Why do/don't you believe in a higher power? (Any HP)

[Aussandries]

Assuming the ten plagues never occurred (going along the lines that the Exodus tale was twisted), the Egyptian economy would crumble regardless if the Hebrews left. Probably not for long though since the peasantry of the time could replace such workers

This didn't happen. Egyptian records report no drop in economic output in the period.

that's cos they uses slaves. They didn't have to pay their workers, so of course the economy wouldn't be any more negatively effected than if there was a slightly worse harvest.

[Tasuirin]

This didn't happen. Egyptian records report no drop in economic output in the period.

that's cos they uses slaves. They didn't have to pay their workers, so of course the economy wouldn't be any more negatively effected than if there was a slightly worse harvest.

Hence, more proof that the story of Hebrew slaves in Egypt is false.

[The Grims]

Also, everyone, sorry for my off and on participation in this thread, but I think something needs to be said:


Why believe in God?

Aside from the fact there is literally no evidence apart from a book and a bunch of writings which only self-reference themselves, Occam's Razor just shaves this off:
"So uhhh...the universe has a beginning, right? So what created it?"
"There's a magic omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omnipresent man outside the universe, all-powerful, all-seeing and all-hearing."
"Isn't there a possibility in which the universe creates itself through scientific processes and the big cru-"
"MAGIC BEING!"

you realise that there are sources in Roman, Greek, Jewish and Egyptian documents about Jesus and His miracles, right? There are first hand accounts inside them, ask any ancient historian

I did. There are no firsthand account of Jesus.
There are about 4 documents within a period of about 100 years after his death that mention him in passing, but never more than a few sentences. There is nothing like the documents you describe.

[Heraswed]

Also, everyone, sorry for my off and on participation in this thread, but I think something needs to be said:


Why believe in God?

Aside from the fact there is literally no evidence apart from a book and a bunch of writings which only self-reference themselves, Occam's Razor just shaves this off:
"So uhhh...the universe has a beginning, right? So what created it?"
"There's a magic omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omnipresent man outside the universe, all-powerful, all-seeing and all-hearing."
"Isn't there a possibility in which the universe creates itself through scientific processes and the big cru-"
"MAGIC BEING!"

"Plus, the universe has a beginning, right? So what created it?"
"Giant explosion creating something from nothing!"
"Wait, isn't that against the laws of phys-"
"GIANT EXPLOSION!"

Great strawman, we more or less understand everything that happened up to about 1 femtosecond after the big-bang. We don't know exactly what caused it. Some (like me) believe in the infinite expansion and contraction of the universe, (which suffers from the same infinite regress as the concept of a creator god). Other research suggests that in mass-less environments particles can be spontaneously generated from energy, with slight favour given to regular matter as opposed to anti-matter. Neither of these is confirmed and we can only really guess at this point.

[Aussandries]

that's cos they uses slaves. They didn't have to pay their workers, so of course the economy wouldn't be any more negatively effected than if there was a slightly worse harvest.

Hence, more proof that the story of Hebrew slaves in Egypt is false.

quite the opposite - the use of slaves, Hebrew or not, means it is fairly likely that they would try and leave anyway. Likewise, the fact that there are no records of this just points to inherent corruption within the Egyptian regime, and fear of the Pharaoh. Would you admit to the despotic leader of your nation who could have you killed in a second without trial that you had allowed hundreds or thousands of slaves to escape? No, of course not. It is likely they just grabbed a whole new lot of slaves before the economy could be too damaged.

[Aussandries]

"Plus, the universe has a beginning, right? So what created it?"
"Giant explosion creating something from nothing!"
"Wait, isn't that against the laws of phys-"
"GIANT EXPLOSION!"

Great strawman, we more or less understand everything that happened up to about 1 femtosecond after the big-bang. We don't know exactly what caused it. Some (like me) believe in the infinite expansion and contraction of the universe, (which suffers from the same infinite regress as the concept of a creator god). Other research suggests that in mass-less environments particles can be spontaneously generated from energy, with slight favour given to regular matter as opposed to anti-matter. Neither of these is confirmed and we can only really guess at this point.

exactly - "we can only guess". Then we shouldn't be arguing over who's guess is correct with absolutely no way of proving either. People should be entitled to their own opinions or beliefs.

[The Grims]

Great strawman, we more or less understand everything that happened up to about 1 femtosecond after the big-bang. We don't know exactly what caused it. Some (like me) believe in the infinite expansion and contraction of the universe, (which suffers from the same infinite regress as the concept of a creator god). Other research suggests that in mass-less environments particles can be spontaneously generated from energy, with slight favour given to regular matter as opposed to anti-matter. Neither of these is confirmed and we can only really guess at this point.

exactly - "we can only guess". Then we shouldn't be arguing over who's guess is correct with absolutely no way of proving either. People should be entitled to their own opinions or beliefs.

Agreed,as long as you stop making up documents that do not exist.
Or provide them ofc. That would also work.

[Heraswed]

Great strawman, we more or less understand everything that happened up to about 1 femtosecond after the big-bang. We don't know exactly what caused it. Some (like me) believe in the infinite expansion and contraction of the universe, (which suffers from the same infinite regress as the concept of a creator god). Other research suggests that in mass-less environments particles can be spontaneously generated from energy, with slight favour given to regular matter as opposed to anti-matter. Neither of these is confirmed and we can only really guess at this point.

exactly - "we can only guess". Then we shouldn't be arguing over who's guess is correct with absolutely no way of proving either. People should be entitled to their own opinions or beliefs.

The difference is that the majority of guesses that scientists make are (while not 100% proven), backed by some form of science. Whereas the claims of religion have no such basis.

[Alvecia]

Great strawman, we more or less understand everything that happened up to about 1 femtosecond after the big-bang. We don't know exactly what caused it. Some (like me) believe in the infinite expansion and contraction of the universe, (which suffers from the same infinite regress as the concept of a creator god). Other research suggests that in mass-less environments particles can be spontaneously generated from energy, with slight favour given to regular matter as opposed to anti-matter. Neither of these is confirmed and we can only really guess at this point.

exactly - "we can only guess". Then we shouldn't be arguing over who's guess is correct with absolutely no way of proving either. People should be entitled to their own opinions or beliefs.

People have that right, doesn't mean we can't argue about the validity of said beliefs.

[Tasuirin]

Hence, more proof that the story of Hebrew slaves in Egypt is false.

quite the opposite - the use of slaves, Hebrew or not, means it is fairly likely that they would try and leave anyway. Likewise, the fact that there are no records of this just points to inherent corruption within the Egyptian regime, and fear of the Pharaoh. Would you admit to the despotic leader of your nation who could have you killed in a second without trial that you had allowed hundreds or thousands of slaves to escape? No, of course not. It is likely they just grabbed a whole new lot of slaves before the economy could be too damaged.

Are slaves just a dime a dozen in your model? And the economy completely unaffected by 12 massive plagues? As well as the sudden loss of the vast majority of the workforce? Which was then followed by, what appeared to be, the leader of the whole country deciding to invade the red sea and then realising that he can't breathe water? There are a lot of factors there that should have been recorded, and with literally any other Pharaoh, they would have been.

[Mystic Warriors]

I dont believe because there is no evidence of a god.

[Aussandries]

exactly - "we can only guess". Then we shouldn't be arguing over who's guess is correct with absolutely no way of proving either. People should be entitled to their own opinions or beliefs.

The difference is that the majority of guesses that scientists make are (while not 100% proven), backed by some form of science. Whereas the claims of religion have no such basis.

I mean, we literally just agreed up there /\ that we have NO PROOF for the causation of the Big Bang.... so what were you saying? Wait, energy can be created from nothing? Some scientific proof... Hmmm... *casually accidently disproves a fundamental law of physics through backing up an unknown creation of energy with "science"*.
Which, btw, you are yet to provide evidenced for your so-called "scientific evidence". Care to share it with us?

[Aussandries]

exactly - "we can only guess". Then we shouldn't be arguing over who's guess is correct with absolutely no way of proving either. People should be entitled to their own opinions or beliefs.

Agreed,as long as you stop making up documents that do not exist.
Or provide them ofc. That would also work.

Josephus, a Jewish writer from the time, recorded Jesus twice within his writings, and while neither were positive particularly, they prove that even His "enemies" acknowledged his existence.

About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.

Furthermore, though you may try to disprove this one, the New Testament of the Bible was written by multiple people, some of whom claimed to have witnessed the events of Jesus' miracles. Likewise, the other writers have their sources from word of mouth, which while can not be said to be reliable, all rumours start from something, and it is very curious that without interior organisation, all these sources tell very similar stories about the life, miracles and death of Christ.

[Aussandries]

I dont believe because there is no evidence of a god.

buddy - u may want to research your arguments before you post them on this message board - we have previously discussed multiple pieces of evidence for the potential existence of God. Have a read through and get back to us

[Andsed]

I dont believe because there is no evidence of a god.

buddy - u may want to research your arguments before you post them on this message board - we have previously discussed multiple pieces of evidence for the potential existence of God. Have a read through and get back to us

Show me one shred of proof that is not some easily explained “miracle” or an anecdote.

[Aussandries]

buddy - u may want to research your arguments before you post them on this message board - we have previously discussed multiple pieces of evidence for the potential existence of God. Have a read through and get back to us

Show me one shred of proof that is not some easily explained “miracle” or an anecdote.

have a read through the forum mate - im not gonna waste space repeating what's already been said.

[Andsed]

Show me one shred of proof that is not some easily explained “miracle” or an anecdote.

have a read through the forum mate - im not gonna waste space repeating what's already been said.

I have and your supposed evidence is shaky at best.

[The New California Republic]

The difference is that the majority of guesses that scientists make are (while not 100% proven), backed by some form of science. Whereas the claims of religion have no such basis.

I mean, we literally just agreed up there /\ that we have NO PROOF for the causation of the Big Bang.... so what were you saying? Wait, energy can be created from nothing? Some scientific proof... Hmmm... *casually accidently disproves a fundamental law of physics through backing up an unknown creation of energy with "science"*.

Science hasn't made any concrete claims regarding the origin of the big bang. Theories perhaps, yes.

[The New California Republic]

I dont believe because there is no evidence of a god.

buddy - u may want to research your arguments before you post them on this message board - we have previously discussed multiple pieces of evidence for the potential existence of God. Have a read through and get back to us

...and dismissed each time, you forgot to add...

[Tasuirin]

Josephus, a Jewish writer from the time, recorded Jesus twice within his writings, and while neither were positive particularly, they prove that even His "enemies" acknowledged his existence.

He was about 63 when he died in about 100CE, making him about 6-ish with the generally accepted chronology of Jesus' death.

About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.

They would have been reporting on hearsay. If Josephus was only 6 when Jesus was alive, I'd say their parents may have been little more than ideas in their parents' heads when Jesus was around. Moreover, the term "prefect" is sometimes used instead of "proconsul", a similar but distinct title. As for when Tiberius was Emperor, that would have been the common knowledge of anyone. For the state historians of Rome, for them not to have known which Emperor was alive when the christians claimed Jesus lived would have been more surprising.

Furthermore, though you may try to disprove this one, the New Testament of the Bible was written by multiple people, some of whom claimed to have witnessed the events of Jesus' miracles. Likewise, the other writers have their sources from word of mouth, which while can not be said to be reliable, all rumours start from something, and it is very curious that without interior organisation, all these sources tell very similar stories about the life, miracles and death of Christ.

We don't know who wrote the gospels, but it is highly likely that the tale was passed around long before it was ever written about. And given the usually accepted dates of their writing (Mark: AD 66–70, Matthew and Luke: AD 85–90, John: AD 90–110 at the most generous dates I've seen in a while) I'd highly doubt that, unless they had extremely long lifespans, any of them would have actually seen Jesus. Also, it has to be noted that Mark, the first-written one, has very little in the way of actual miracles, while John is the most miracle-heavy of the gospels, so it would make sense by the idea that details were added as time went on.

[Aussandries]

have a read through the forum mate - im not gonna waste space repeating what's already been said.

I have and your supposed evidence is shaky at best.

really. you have read through all 125 pages?

[Tasuirin]

I have and your supposed evidence is shaky at best.

really. you have read through all 125 pages?

If your evidence really is as dynamic as you say it is, I'd expect that you'd have sent it to more than one person. Actually, I'd expect a little less blowback in response to someone asking you to give them said evidence. In fact, I'd reckon you would want to give it to anyone who asks, to save them from the hell you believe they would go to if they don't believe. But, what do I know?

[The New California Republic]

I have and your supposed evidence is shaky at best.

really. you have read through all 125 pages?

I have been here since page 1, and I have read all the pages thus far, and there has been no evidence to prove the existence of a God.

[Australian rePublic]

I think I have a theory as to how God, but I want to get it theologically asseced before posting

[The New California Republic]

I think I have a theory as to how God, but I want to get it theologically asseced before posting

I can't wait to tear this to shreds I mean, give constructive feedback...