The Energon Pub

Sign Of The Cross wrote:

Shadowman wrote:Christianity. The world's biggest Religion. And only One God. But, certainly, there must've been something before Christianity?

Yes, there was. Hindu, Islam, Judaism (Which are still around), Norse, Greek, and it's remake Roman, Shinto, Buddhism, Confucianism, Rastafari, and MANY more exist and/or still exist.

What I'm saying is, what if Christianity is Wrong? What if the Norse was right, or the Hindu, or even the Greeks? What if Jesus was just a Man? What there were many Gods, instead of One? What would you do if suddenly, Odin, or Horus, or Vishnu pops out of the sky, and tell you what REALLY exists?

Keep in mind, I'm not saying anyone is wrong, I'm saying WHAT IF you're wrong?

Do you actually have a response?

Sagitta wrote:Biblical Christianity and all its claims hinges on Jesus Christ's resurrection from the dead. 1 Corinthians 15 is a good place to look. Goes over all the wittinesses, 500 in all, who even testified seeing the risen Jesus. They were either telling the truth or they weren't.

I think you are making an oversight. There were not 500 witnesses who testified to seeing the risen Jesus. There was ONE person who WROTE that there were 500 witnesses.

Do you see the difference?

Professor Smooth wrote:

Sagitta wrote:Biblical Christianity and all its claims hinges on Jesus Christ's resurrection from the dead. 1 Corinthians 15 is a good place to look. Goes over all the wittinesses, 500 in all, who even testified seeing the risen Jesus. They were either telling the truth or they weren't.

I think you are making an oversight. There were not 500 witnesses who testified to seeing the risen Jesus. There was ONE person who WROTE that there were 500 witnesses.

Do you see the difference?

It's like saying Harry Potter can cast magic because it lists 1000 students who saw him do it.

Shadowman wrote:It's like saying Harry Potter can cast magic because it lists 1000 students who saw him do it.

It's more than that. It's like saying that Harry Potter is REAL and can cast magic because it lists 1,000 students who saw him do it.

Professor Smooth wrote:

Sagitta wrote:Biblical Christianity and all its claims hinges on Jesus Christ's resurrection from the dead. 1 Corinthians 15 is a good place to look. Goes over all the wittinesses, 500 in all, who even testified seeing the risen Jesus. They were either telling the truth or they weren't.

I think you are making an oversight. There were not 500 witnesses who testified to seeing the risen Jesus. There was ONE person who WROTE that there were 500 witnesses.

Do you see the difference?

I take it you may be forgetting this was a portion of a letter which was written to a church in Corinth at the time. Several specific names were given...as well as the reference to the 500 persons. Thus, the total would have been over 500 individuals. Were the the additional 500 listed by name? No. Could they have been? Yes. Else why was it noted some of them had already died by the time of the writing?

Also to note, what of the opposition which was prevalent -- mostly in the form of the Jewish religious leaders who knew where the original body of Jesus was buried and could have all too easily crushed the Christian faith at the very beginning. They knew where the body was. And it was under guard by Roman soldiers. To break the seal of the tomb would be the same as committing a crime against Caesar.

Professor Smooth wrote:

Shadowman wrote:It's like saying Harry Potter can cast magic because it lists 1000 students who saw him do it.

It's more than that. It's like saying that Harry Potter is REAL and can cast magic because it lists 1,000 students who saw him do it.

Are you speaking of 1,000 students within his books, the same books which already acknowledge they are fictional? When the book already acknowledges it's fictional, it goes without saying so are the characters.

Difference between a book of fiction acknowledging it is a book of fiction and book which places itself as not.

As commented, one either believes the witnesses or they don't. One either believes the witnesses existed or they don't. One either believes the events the witnesses' claim to have seen or they don't. That in no way changes whether or not the events actually occurred. Only one's acceptance or denial of them.

Glyph wrote:

Shadowman wrote:Keep in mind, I'm not saying anyone is wrong, I'm saying WHAT IF you're wrong?

If I'm wrong, then I'll have spent my whole adult life believing that I am loved unconditionally and favoured beyond merit, and trying to be the very best human being I can be.

I've gotta ask, what is merit, and what does it have to do with love anyway? I have yet to meet anyone who has actually ever 'deserved' anything.

Sagitta wrote:

Professor Smooth wrote:

Shadowman wrote:It's like saying Harry Potter can cast magic because it lists 1000 students who saw him do it.

It's more than that. It's like saying that Harry Potter is REAL and can cast magic because it lists 1,000 students who saw him do it.

Are you speaking of 1,000 students within his books, the same books which already acknowledge they are fictional? When the book already acknowledges it's fictional, it goes without saying so are the characters.

Difference between a book of fiction acknowledging it is a book of fiction and book which places itself as not.

As commented, one either believes the witnesses or they don't. One either believes the witnesses existed or they don't. One either believes the events the witnesses' claim to have seen or they don't. That in no way changes whether or not the events actually occurred. Only one's acceptance or denial of them.

I once saw his movie which claimed it was based on a true story, which it clearly wasn't.

Glyph wrote:

Shadowman wrote:Keep in mind, I'm not saying anyone is wrong, I'm saying WHAT IF you're wrong?

If I'm wrong, then I'll have spent my whole adult life believing that I am loved unconditionally and favoured beyond merit, and trying to be the very best human being I can be.

except that your concept of "best" is based on a morality based on christianity, so what you think is best, is not neccasarily so.

Tammuz wrote:

Glyph wrote:

Shadowman wrote:Keep in mind, I'm not saying anyone is wrong, I'm saying WHAT IF you're wrong?

If I'm wrong, then I'll have spent my whole adult life believing that I am loved unconditionally and favoured beyond merit, and trying to be the very best human being I can be.

except that your concept of "best" is based on a morality based on christianity, so what you think is best, is not neccasarily so.

Yeah, it's really all subjective. Christianity may be the best in one persons' mind, but Islam may be the best in someone elses'. This we already know, and in the long run, belief is a form of opinion. While you might think that turning the other cheek is the best policy, I might belive that getting even with someone is. Not you specifically Tammuz, but you know what I mean. There really is no way to prove that one belief is right, or more correct than any other, because the best evidence that one has is their own belief, which isn't factual. That would go for all faiths really; while it might sound rediculous to say that I pray to my couch for guidance and strength, but fundamentally it's not too far removed from praying to a god in some heavenly realm.

Anyways, I'm just passing through.