the god who wasn ' t there
for more information about
the god who wasn' t there ,
visit urltoken .
as i was walking up the stairs i met a man who wasn’t there. he wasn’t there again today god! i wish he’d go away !
critical notes on the movie the god who wasn' t there; researched and compiled by richard c. carrier
i wasn’t singling anyone out with my comments–there would be too many to mention .
three years ago, i promoted and appeared in the atheist documentary “the god who wasn’t there, ” dedicated to the proposition that jesus never existed .
there wasn' t a single voice of opposition. there wasn' t any mention of how the state government is giving answers in genesis up to $ 18 million in tax breaks. and there wasn' t even a mention of how the whole noah' s ark story is fiction .
the god who wasn' t there is a documentary film, released in june 2005. it was written and directed by former fundamentalist christian brian flemming .
the god who wasn' t there by brian flemming, scott butcher, alan dundes, david p. mikkelson | 837101074865 | dvd | barnes & noble®
so you want to debate me... so you would like to challenge me about the claims i make in the god who wasn' t there ?
there are lots of people who aren' t aware of the existence of a loving god. therefore such a god does not exist
we think of god as a perfect being. if god didn' t exist he wouldn' t be perfect. god is perfect, therefore god exists .
i wanted to like the new film until i realized it wasn’t based on the bible .
from the rational response squad to the blasphemy challenge. from the god delusion to the end of faith and the god who wasn' t there, atheists are on the move and in the news. richard dawkins, sam
going back to the beginning of the universe... i wasn’t there to observe how it happened (thankfully – i’d probably be bedridden at this point). you weren’t there. nobody was there !
remember the the blasphemy challenge, sponsored by the rational response squad, who were giving away 1001 copies of the movie the god who wasn’t there to people who will create a video of themselves denying the existence of god, and especially, the holy spirit? they posted their videos on youtube .
you' re talking about the god who wasn' t there. it goes past atheism, which merely denies the resurrection as improbable without the existence of god, and examines all the documentation presented as evidence for even a historical man named jesus .
bilbo baggins the hobbit was as just as real as jesus. he wasn’t an authentic hobbit, just a kid with pointy ears. it wasn’t long ago when most people thought moses was historical too .
“sex wasn’t the only thing stolen from them. it wasn’t even the biggest thing, ” james la matterly, a member in the early 1970s, told the san francisco chronicle in 2005. “their spirituality was stolen. god was stolen from them. ”
in his film
the god who wasn' t there ,
brian flemming questions the very existence of jesus christ, a premise that might leave some hard - core christians convinced this former christian is going to hell .
it says that we should assume that god does not exist, and put the onus on people who believe in god to to prove that god does exist .
afraid not. aquinas simply assumes the existence of his god and goes from there .
you believe now, i don’t believe. i believe you don’t believe. you don’t believe i believe. i don’t believe, i believe .
trapped in our atheist bias, it is too easy to dismiss paul as just another frothing - at - the - mouth crazy preacher who got lucky…. he wasn’t .
niv: therefore, there is no condemnation for those who are in christ jesus .
rsv: there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in christ jesus .
a notorious christian apologist named j. p. holding has admitted that the case made in the god who wasn' t there is so solid that he could not refute it in a debate. he has backed out of a former debate challenge by stating :
as long as god wants me in public service, and the people want a man who honors god serving in ...
melissa “only god could change his heart, and only god can change yours. ”
agreed. i certainly don’t claim to know there was not a historical jesus .
the author of revelation was a follower of jesus, but he wasn’t what some people would call a christian today, pagels says .
[ … ] see no reason hide this. i' m willing to bet that the documentary you' re referring to is either the god who wasn' t there or zeitgeist. neither movie is actually a documentary. both are works of pure fiction presented as [ … ]
[ … ] from the basic assumption of “first, there is no god”, this man has now declared “first, there is a god”. raving atheist has converted! [ … ]
but in his century he wasn' t breaking the rule named after him. 14th century science knew nothing about evolution or how the universe came into being. god was the only explanation available .
there is no point in discussing the existence of jesus if no one can even prove the existence of god. so, i don’t care !
obviously there are mean - spirited people in the atheist community just like there are mean - spirited people in the believing - in - god community .
i am an agnostic / athiest who is looking to follow. i am not there yet .
those who participate at the flemming site, urltoken, receive a free dvd of the documentary “the god who wasn’t there, ” which mr. flemming wrote, directed and produced. mr. flemming, a former evangelical christian turned atheist, said the dvds cost him about $ 25, 000. so far, more than 1, 000 people have turned on their cameras to deny the existence of god .
nkjv: there is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in christ jesus who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the spirit .
i don’t agree with atheism, but i don’t viciously attack people who don’t believe in god, in fact i enjoy talking with them and debating them. it can get heated, but i don’t question the validity or sanity of my opponents when they disagree with me .
108 there is no point in discussing the existence of jesus if no one can even prove the existence of god. so, i don’t care !
science and faith aren' t at odds. god created the big - bang .
there is still no evidence for a god of any kind, and even less for any particular religion’s god, as far as i know .
“in the same way, i tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of god over one sinner who repents. ”” luke 15: 10
and so there is no being that is completely good, knows everything, and is all powerful. and so, there is no god .
there’s this way that thomas jefferson is represented as the one bad founding father who did participate in slavery .
where is the one who is wise? where is the scribe? where is the debater of this age? has not god made foolish the wisdom of the world? for since, in the wisdom of god, the world did not know god through wisdom, it pleased god through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe .
this documentary argues the “mythicist” case in the historical jesus debate. this position says that jesus of nazareth wasn’t a real person but a fiction based on jewish scriptures and mystery religions of the roman empire. it doesn’t make sense to talk about a “real” jesus – there wasn’t any. this documentary has good information but could have been better produced – any high school student could have done a better job .
my point is those who have faith in the one true god of jesus have faith and all others don’t have faith but faith. therefore “without faith it is impossible to please god” comes into play .
all right then; if the existence of a complex thing is evidence of a creator, who created god? surely god is more complex than his creations .
for the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of god. for it is written ,
the existence of evil seems inconsistent with the existence of a god who is wholly good, and can do anything .
just because hunger is generated in the brain by physical processes doesn’t mean that food doesn’t exist .
william of occam would not have agreed; he was a franciscan monk who never doubted the existence of god .
there’s no other book in the bible quite like revelation, but there are plenty of books like revelation that didn’t make it into the bible, pagels says .
“ i am an agnostic / athiest who is looking to follow. i am not there yet. ”
some philosophers think that religious language doesn' t mean anything at all, and therefore that there' s no point in asking whether god exists .
there was even another “secret revelation of john. ” in this one, jesus wasn’t a divine warrior, but someone who first appeared to the apostle paul as a blazing light, then as a child, an old man and, some scholars say, a woman .
neb: the conclusion of the matter is this: there is no condemnation for those who are united with christ jesus .
there’s a common perception that there was a golden age of christianity, when most christians agreed on an uncontaminated version of the faith. yet there was never one agreed - upon christianity. there were always clashing visions .
shocking footage shows u. s. military forcibly removing christian so he can' t talk about god
nevertheless, there are obvious differences between the resurrections of jesus and krishna’s appearance to the hunter who killed him. these are :
thanks for your comment. i think you may have misunderstood my introductory paragraph, which mentions the current popular controversy surrounding the da vinci code. i merely mentioned it to introduce the god who wasn’t there, a privately produced documentary which takes a much more radical approach to jesus ‘scholarship’ than dan brown did in his research for the da vinci code. other than the introduction, there are no other comparisons between the two projects .
social support is not an argument for god. good feeling are not an argument for god. nice christians are not an argument for god. mean atheists are not an argument for god. shoddy history is not an argument for god. saying you have arguments but not presenting them is, obviously, not an argument for god .
most atheists would offer some of the following arguments as their reason for deciding that god doesn' t exist .
first, there is no god. in fact, all definitions of the word “god” are either self - contradictory, incoherent, meaningless or refuted by empirical, scientific evidence .
according to edwin yamauchi “there’s no resurrection of marduk or dionysus …… there was no real resurrection of tammuz. ”
afraid not. aquinas simply assumes the existence of his god and goes from there. circular reasoning, to say the least .
atheists argue that because everything in the universe can be explained in a satisfactory way without using god as part of the explanation, then there is no point in saying that god exists .
... there can be no way of proving that the existence of a god... is even probable .
the single statement from josephus simply states there was somebody called jesus who was the brother of james. what exactly does that prove ?
it is the participants who may have made the antireligion videos on a lark who worry mr. mickey, who feels that a young person who makes such a video now may choose not to become a christian later for fear of having committed an unforgivable sin .
and, let us not forget, that there is almost no evidence for 99. 99% of us who exist today of our ancestors who lived a few thousand years ago .
1. noah wasn’t distant from god. in aronofsky’s film, noah (played by russell crowe) is a tortured soul who senses through a dream that the mysterious “creator” (he is never called god) plans to destroy the world with a flood. but in genesis 6 - 8, much of the account involves direct communication from god to noah (see 6: 13; 7: 1; 8: 15). noah was god’s close friend, and he understood him .
294 argument from ignorance is not an argument for god. argument from complexity is not an argument for god. *
for the ancients, god provided the power that made the universe work, and god provided the structure within which the universe worked and human beings lived .
since we theists get swept into a pile in many cases it’s simply a reaction to those who lump me in with everyone else who professes to believe in a god. however, how many nicknames are there for theists in the nonbelieving community? theists don’t really have an atheist equivalent for “fundy” or worse
a group called the rational response squad–inspired, they say, by dawkins–has offered the blasphemy challenge: film yourself blaspheming against the holy spirit, post the video on youtube, and receive a free dvd of their documentary, “the god who wasn’t there. ” (this video “proves” that not only was jesus not divine, but he also didn’t exist at all–which latter point will take some proving, given the overwhelming evidence for jesus’ existence from the ancient world. )
jesus is not pagan - all things are possibe with god. god has, and will preserve his truth for the faithful .
disc # 1 - - the god that wasn' t there play movie chapters features extended interviews play all scott butcher richard carrier alan dundes sam harris barbara & david p. mikkelson robert m. price ronald sipus commentaries the scholar: commentary on the
christ myth
theory from scholar earl doherty, author of
the jesus puzzle
the atheists: godless commentary from scientist richard dawkins, the world' s most famous atheist; blogger the raving atheist, the web' s most famous atheist; and others
explore the myth
begin slide show cast & crew bios view bios music play
is this the real thing ?
play
the god who wasn' t there
play
blood sacrifice ritual
play
the price
no problem. but please understand that i get a lot of these requests, and i can' t waste my time arguing with people who are not open to changing their minds or who haven' t developed enough familiarity with the material .
“there were always debates about it, ” she says. “some people said a heretic wrote it. some said a disciple. there were always people who loved and championed it. ”
stephen hawking has declared that his latest work shows there was no creator of the universe. but we shouldn' t imagine that will settle the god vs science debate, says graham farmelo .
and if god had decided to organise the universe in such a hierarchy, this provided a strong argument against anyone who wanted to suggest that society could be organised in a fairer and more equal way - god had shown us the perfect way to organise things, and those who were ruling did so by a right given by god .
some contend, however, that there is a related unpardonable sin, committed by those who once believed and no longer do .
some people think that religions and belief in god fulfil functions in human society, rather than being the result of god actually existing .
the film has been criticized by conservative christian groups like focus on the family, which has taken issue with its scholarship, and praised by religious skeptics as an antidote to blind faith. following a limited theatrical run ,
the god who wasn' t there
has been screening at venues around the country, including many showings sponsored by atheist groups. the dvd went on sale in stores jan. 31 .
the prosperity gospel is much like all other religions in that it uses faith, it uses doing good things to leverage material blessings from god. essentially, use god to get things from god .
atheists say that these explain the world so much better than the existence of god. they also say that far from god being a good explanation for the world, it' s god that now requires explaining .
this half - way house between religion and science still had problems for the faithful, since it didn' t seem to leave much room for god to intervene in the universe - and certainly it didn' t need god to keep things ticking over .
since you couldn' t verify the existence of god by any sort of
sense experience
, and it wasn' t true by definition (eg in the way
a triangle has 3 sides
is true), the logical positivists argued that it was pointless asking the question since it could not be answered true or false .
the idea that god steered everything in the universe as he saw fit was demolished by the discovery that there were natural laws obeyed by objects in the universe .
nice to see you put the reason that god provided you toward the eminently just and rational act of submitting, worshipping, and adoring the one, true, living god. it’s as it should be. who’s next ?
for jews demand signs and greeks seek wisdom, but we preach christ crucified, a stumbling block to jews and folly to gentiles, but to those who are called, both jews and greeks, christ the power of god and the wisdom of god. for the foolishness of god is wiser than men, and the weakness of god is stronger than men .
here' s the core of the problem: even if atheists are wrong, christians are not necessarily right. if there is indeed a god, out of the thousands of gods humans have worshipped and the infinite number of gods we haven' t even thought of yet, the chances that the real god is the christian god exactly as described are not just miniscule but negligible .
luke 12: 8 - 10 (see also mark 3: 28 - 29) and i tell you, everyone who acknowledges me before men, the son of man also will acknowledge before the angels of god, but the one who denies me before men will be denied before the angels of god .
in other words, men who purposely harden themselves to god have made an informed choice, and god will not force himself into such a heart. they know the deal, and refuse it. does that mean all who understand the gospel, become “believers” and then turn away are doomed ?
an atheist might respond by asking what caused god. (and what caused the cause of god, and so on .) the argument might proceed that if god didn' t need a cause, then maybe the universe didn' t need a cause either. if god was already perfect before he created the universe, why did he create it? how did it benefit him? why would he bother? and if the universe was caused, perhaps something other than god caused it ?
calling other people a “dick”, fine, do it. at least they don’t have to call themselves cherry - picking morons who yap on topics they don’t appear to have the slightest clue about .
but debunking claims about the existence of gods is just showing those who make such claims that they can’t assert what they’re trying to assert .
believers, who uphold the implausible and more easily - dismissed “christ of faith” (the divine jesus who walked on water), ought not to get involved .
there are plenty of conflicting gospels with similar false claims about who their authors were, but none were written within decades of supposed events .
greetings from another ex - atheist who had to change her mind after processing all the evidence that my point of view didn’t agree with the facts .
on the other hand, someone who thinks you’re reprobate, who thinks an all - powerful deity is on their side, someone who thinks you’re an affront to that deity (who happens to be their bestest invisible friend in the whole world) … now that’s the kind of person you have to watch out for .
there are a number of traditional arguments used to prove that god exists; however, none of them convinces atheists. here they are :
to me, an atheist is someone who has looked at the argument for god and found it extremely wanting. i consider the chance that god exists to be vanishingly small, to the point where it' s not worth thinking about .
you are correct in saying that there are millions who’s existence we cannot prove. but, it doesn’t matter if their existence and legacy are not based on extraordinary claims that defy the laws of nature. hitchens clearly stated this his analogy of the existence of socrates. there’s is very little evidence that he did exist. no matter. his contributions to western civilization are not dependent on the validity of his claims, or even his existence. not so for jc. if his mother wasn’t impregnated by god, if he didn’t really walk on water, or he didn’t rise from his grave after three days, the religion is invalid. what are they to believe in then? you see my point ?
welcome home rt. may the lord our god bless you now and always .
i believe there are no written eyewitness accounts of the existence of jesus christ .
for the umpteenth time, atheism does not presuppose nihilism. that is a misconception – a lie, actually – promulgated by religionists who can’t see any reason for morality unless there’s a sky daddy making them be moral .
“if god is all - good and all - powerful, then he wouldn’t will for evil to exist. but clearly evil exists. therefore god cannot be both all - good and all - powerful. ”
saying “i found jesus but i can’t explain, it’s personal” holds absolutely no appeal to anyone who isn’t given to credulity by default. i do understand how others among the credulous might find it appealing though. ”
emily henochowicz, an 18 - year - old who denied god with a wry smile in her video, is among those who find the videos an interesting way to talk through the issues of religion and faith. but others are deeply offended .
may you find your path of enlightenment through your time of darkness. for no god will be there when you die and become one with the abyss .
i’m not sure who to goad on more, the statistics battlers or the brewing interfaith warriors .
what is indisputably a big deal, however, is the terrifying situation of those who encourage such actions, and those, such as dawkins, who inspire them .
by throwing in with any god, including him, one has a far greater chance of offending some other god who happens to be the real one, and being forced to explain one' s worship of a popular, well - liked but still false god. atheists wouldn' t have that problem, and might even receive credit for combating belief in false gods .
revelation was an anti - roman tract and a piece of war propaganda wrapped in one. the message: god would return and destroy the romans who had destroyed jerusalem .
the people who wrote the story existed, but that does not make the characters in it real people .
romans 8: 1 kjv: there is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in christ jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit .
we have an interesting investigation in process from one of our readers who was a student of the late alan dundes, who was featured in the film. we now have a
jesus exists it is no doubt, flavius wrote about jesus, he wrote the person who was strong in talk. the real question is jesus the son of god, messiash ?
follow god on the most fulfilling journey of your life with encounter the holy spirit! break away from past hurts and press into the one who wants a personal encounter with you .
if you abandon god, you don’t lose all your friends and commenters – they simply pray for you and hope you come back to the truth .
this is a bit puzzling: wasn' t world war ii supposed to have been
the good war ,
one of the few in history in which there was relative moral clarity? and didn' t ambrose write band of brothers for spielberg, a script that was realistic about war but not anti - war. we were seeking to defeat adolf hitler after all .
i don’t think the author is trying to prove that he did not exist. he’s not making any claims actually. the title of this post clearly says it all: there is essential no credible evidence for his existence. so, it’s the believers who are making extraordinary claims. the onus to prove something is there’s alone .
this question is nonsense like this: “does god exists? ” no, there is no proof, so talking about it means talking about nothing .
i can name at least half a dozen scholars who disagree with her view .
there may have been an actual rabble rouser with the specific name jesus. but that doesn’t give credence at all to the “story” of his existence and life .
prophetic messages from respected leaders & news of how god is moving throughout the world .
why
is god real ?
is the most boring question you can ask .
as to the theistic contention that if our actions are determined, life has no ultimate meaning – yeah, so what? life’s what you make it. sky daddy isn’t there and doesn’t care. get over it .
the theory of evolution explains the variety of life forms on earth without any reference to god .
a documentary on kids who attend a summer camp hoping to become the next billy graham .
you don’t have to be a student of religion to recognize references from the book of revelation. the last book in the bible has fascinated readers for centuries. people who don’t even follow religion are nonetheless familiar with figures and images from revelation .
for most of human history god was the best explanation for the existence and nature of the physical universe .
ahh the power of religion. or is it the draw of a certain person who is religious ?
can’t you just make the rational case for god here in the comments? even one or two paragraphs to get us started and we can see how things go .
if we were called to be silent, jesus wouldn’t have told us to make disciples of all nations. you can’t very well make disciples if you never speak your faith to anyone. you also make another assumption about god based on your ignorance. god works in many ways; through people, events, etc. just because you aren’t open to hearing anything i have to say about god doesn’t mean that someone else won’t reach you in another way. maybe you aren’t one who will be reached through a blog. maybe it will happen face to face with someone. i don’t know. all i know is that i am not ashamed of my lord and savior, and i am not afraid to speak about him and all he has done for me. you don’t have to like it or believe it, but i care enough for you to share my heart because hell isn’t something i would wish on anyone !
bowling for columbine did it to the gun culture. super size me did it to fast food. now the god who wasn' t there does it to religion. holding modern christianity up to a bright spotlight, this bold and often hilarious new film asks the questions few dare to ask. your guide through the world of christendom is former fundamentalist brian flemming, joined by such luminaries as jesus seminar fellow robert m. price, professor richard dawkins, author sam harris and historian richard carrier. urltoken
the universe is such a beautiful and orderly thing that it must have been designed. only god could have designed it. therefore since the universe exists, god must exist .
we catholics define hell as separation from god for eternity. if you died and met god, would you want to go to heaven if he asked you? or would you persist in your denial and separate yourself voluntarily from god ?
ok sorry i forgot to mention that that the phrase sandwiched in the middle “who was called christ” is the bit that it is thought to have been later interdicted by a christian scholar. but even if it does refer to a jesus who was considered a messiah that doesn’t mean he existed or if he did who he was. like john frum
you want to give god all the credit but none of the blame, shifting it to satan, who is, evidently from all these unchallenged natural horrors, significantly more powerful .
he makes this extremely daring, radically blasphemous argument—essentially that god is, if not evil, then hopelessly incompetent—most explicitly in the chapter about the soldier who
sees everything twice .
beneath the popular current of the davinci code controversy (which i have addressed in several articles) is another attack on the christian faith, this one more of a grassroots effort, not sheltered by the guise of fiction, but overtly labeling itself as a factual documentary which exposes the “truth” about the christian faith. this “documentary” is called the god who wasn’t there, and was produced by brian flemming and distributed through a network of “guerilla - style” operatives who attempt to plant the dvd and other literature on church grounds and other christian gathering places (i mentioned this project briefly in an earlier post called ‘ the war on easter ’) .
while there is negligible historical evidence of an individual jesus character, there is quite a lot of evidence of the evolution of the meme of an abrahamic god from earlier and geographically local deities. (as linked to canaanite religions on my comment ;) urltoken
at any rate, congrats. i trust that you – just as i have – won’t give up on thinking about and fighting in your mind whether or not god exists. read aquinas and you can’t go wrong .
merry christmas and god bless you! i somehow knew this would happen eventually .
religion without god: alain de botton on
atheism 2. 0 .
and for scorpy1 up there, which sheep are you talking about? the ones who are bleating “welcome back” or the ones who are bleating “you suck and i’ll never talk to you again”? because they’re both funny, and the funniest sheep are the ones thinking they’re smarter than the other sheep .
exactly, it was called “hiring out. ” and it was super common, particularly in cities, for people who owned surplus slaves to rent them out by the year, or by the job, to people who didn’t own slaves. and so hamilton totally did that. he’s absolutely documented to have done that. so it’s not like he was like oh my god! don’t let me touch slavery !
reach your full potential and be led by his spirit. in his presence takes you to a deeper understanding of who god is and how he communicates with us .
i happen to strongly believe the evidence points toward creation, and god, and jesus .
this is an argument about where to begin the discussion of whether or not god exists .
no, no one really does that. you know why? because their own souls witness to the fact that god exists. maybe not the christian god specifically, but the moral law is written on our hearts, and all of creation screams that a god exists .
5. modern scholars who claim to have uncovered the real historical jesus depict wildly different persons .
5. the jewish were a people who refrained from allowing pagan myths to invade their culture .
please tell me how a vote for a man who would stand for the life of the ...
i' m targeting a sort of person who thinks believing in religion has never really been an option and who isn’t particularly interested in attacking religion, declaring it stupid, seeing its errors and flaws and cruelties. all of which, to my mind, clearly exist, but this person isn’t exercised by this .
i think this discussion is about proof. everybody wants proof that what they believe is correct, because what we believe shapes our lives. going back to the beginning of the universe... i wasn’t there to observe how it happened (thankfully – i’d probably be bedridden at this point). you weren’t there. nobody was there! evolution and creation are both beliefs that require a measure of faith. when it comes to proof, as you mentioned, both beliefs are impossible to prove because we don’t have all the facts. but we do have a lot of evidence, so it’s a matter of weighing the evidence and seeing where it points .
and yet, the responses i heard from many of my theist friends were hardly better: “we don’t understand it, but it’s part of god’s will. ” really? the holocaust was god’s will? purposeless suffering of children in famine struck regions, is that god’s will too? on second thought, the atheist position is sounding like the better of the two .
merry christmas to you trt! ! i am thankful to god for you! i have only known you a short while but cannot deny the presence of god in your life. i pray that you have the most memorable christmas yet! god bless you! !
for it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the holy spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of god and the powers of the age to come, if they then fall away, since they are crucifying once again the son of god to their own harm and holding him up to contempt .
i' m not interested in directly preserving anything, because i don’t believe that you can go to church if you don’t believe in it .
[ man’s speech bubble says “why do you need to prove god doesn’t exist? ” to which woman responds “i’m just exposing your flawed reasoning. ” ]
psalm 19: 1 - 3 the heavens declare the glory of god, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. there is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard .
you can’t because they don’t exist because while the romans were fairly good by ancient standards at keeping records the things they kept records about were the things that they cared about .
he’s going to have a hard time appealing to anyone who isn’t already credulous without offering up some sort of explanation. but you’re right, it’s his prerogative .
< strong > luke 6: 20 - 21 < / strong > then he looked up at his disciples and said:' blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of god.' blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled.' blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh .
those who have been able reach the site explain in their own posts why the church isn' t able to function as a shelter at the moment. it' s also partially underwater :
fortunately, there’s third explanation. enter the biblical meta - narrative of the great controversy between good and evil. the problem of evil raises concerns about god’s character; the great controversy addresses those head on .
don’t be at all surprised if the bubble isn’t eventually pricked and your man - god doesn’t turn out to be a complete work of fiction after all. and considering how fallacious so much of the bible truly is why is it so difficult to imagine that the character, jesus of nazareth was simply a ”vehicle” to drive a plot ?
i guess there’s not much point in trying to explain it to someone who thinks that the only possible morality comes from a made - up being. if you think most atheists are nihilistic, you aren’t paying attention. google “humanism” to find out more .
note as well the supposition inherent here: that if you disagree with his views, it must be because you
haven' t developed enough familiarity with the material
. there is no conception that someone who is thoroughly familiar with the material could possibly disagree with him .
as atheists our interests are advanced by finding the man who wasn’t there. we should admit our bias at the outset. raphael lataster conceals his bias in the guise of a “fair and reasonable rule” which would effectively exclude anyone who is not an atheist from the discussion. in the u. s. (and australia i imagine) atheists comprise less than 5% of the population. lataster welcomes himself, his imaginary twin brother and their imaginary friend - atheists to the bone - to the dialogue. he spends too much time talking to himself at the expense of free open inquiry and intellectual integrity .
author and evangelist joel osteen, senior pastor of houston' s enormous lakewood church, came in for criticism in the early days of hurricane harvey aftermath, with many including fellow clergymen demanding to know why the facility wasn' t turned into a shelter for storm refugees .
logical positivists argued that a sentence was meaningless if it wasn' t either true or false, and they said that a sentence would only be true or false if it could be tested by an experiment, or if it was true by definition .
300 the size of the gospel’s print run is not an argument for god. the existence of self - appointed holy men is not an argument for god (indeed it is entirely too common) .
praise god that his arms of grace are long enough to embrace even the most abominable sinner .
huh? please provide the quote from the united states constitution. i certainly can’t find it .
nobody will read this 295th comment – if you do, god help us all .
312 arguing that i would not believe you anyway is not an argument for god .
god talks to her and reveals new information to her... a lot !
after much consideration, she decided to stop believing in “mysticism, ” including god .
3. even the new testament stories don’t claim to be first - hand accounts .
your post gave no indication of what caused you to switch to a religious worldview, could you please give some information on what led you down this road and if you now believe in a theistic god (who answers prayers, meddles in human affairs etc .) or a deistic god (who set the parameters for the universe and took no further part in it )
some people like to tie the “blasphemy against the holy spirit” scriptures with others that discuss believers who fall away. but let me say clearly, t hat is an entirely different matter .
we are no more rude nor less polite than are the jesus freaks who infest our web sites .
the point appears ,
there are no roman records of pontius pilate ordering the execution of jesus .
it seems that no matter what side of the argument one takes there is simply no proof .
or are you suggesting that we should trust the author of such a bestselling book? ok, fair enough. who is the author? or rather, authors? i guess they could tell a relatively ok story, even if their characterization wasn’t so great and the story was extremely inconsistent and had various contradictions of theme, as well as characters changing their personalities at random .
steveg, with all due respect, i wasn’t asking you, i was asking gail f. . i don’t imagine that you would presume to speak for all christians on what they think the afterlife is like, would you? . i realize that nobody has specifically stated that atheists are going to hell, which is why i asked the question .
with all due respect (and there isn’t much left after your condescending drivel), you don’t have the first fucking clue what i have experienced. if praying makes you feel good, by all means, waste some more of your precious time .
i should mention that the above essay merely skims some conclusions that i have reached in my own research. this essay is by no means a comprehensive representation of the mythicist case, nor is the god who wasn' t there, which is merely an introduction to the case. earl doherty, robert m. price, richard carrier and others (none of whom i speak for here) have made the case and various facets of it more comprehensively and far better than i can. i would encourage readers of the debateblog to experience these works directly, especially if you fear them .
receive the power and gifts that come through the holy spirit baptism. don’t go empty - handed; accept all that he has for you! his power is available to those who ask .
gp: if you’d stick your head outside the atheist echo chamber, you’d discover that you simply don’t know what you are talking about. before taking up the question “does god exist? ” thomas takes up the question of whether the existence of god is self - evident. he answers in the negative :
in any event, the
eternal happiness / tempermental sky god
phrase doesn' t describe our beleif system, though it reflects no doubt the caricatured system flemming held to as a former believer. call ours the system of the predictable patron / suzerain god responsible for the honor ratings of his subjects .
but what is at the core of it is between you and god and absolutely personal to you .
two hundred and ninety comments, and i have yet to hear any actual reasons or evidence why one should believe in any god, let alone the specific god many here seem to prefer .
therefore atheists might argue that since the entire universe, and all of creation can be explained by evolution and scientific cosmology, we don' t need the existence of another entity called god .
i guess not. oh, by the way, there is more abuse among teachers that in the priesthood .
flemming apparently thinks the
three
magi are in the bible (it nowhere says there were three) .
referring to those who have denied the existence of god, mr. mickey, a baptist, said, “i pray for their souls’ salvation and that they will repent for what they’ve done. ”
there is no way that this is for real. just like that, huh? on the same day that you posted an atheist related topic? no transition whatever. still have the basic assumptions beginning with “there is no god” up on top right. nope. once again an atheist proves personally and morally unattractive by jerking the chains of other people who are basically decent and want the best for you .
303 excremental metaphors and a thesaurus, even together, are not an argument for god .
religion without god: alain de botton on
atheism 2. 0 .
- vox
did historical jesus really exist? the evidence just doesn’t add up. | richard dawkins foundation
trump thinks immigration is his party’s winning issue in midterms. the polls aren’t so sure .
if this person truly believes that hell is a fiery pit of suffering, and is condemning me, in the name of their god, to burn there forever, i think that’s pertinent .
we had to replace three local actors, including one who was to play ...
rick henderson is a pastor who blogs at urltoken. this post first appeared on his blog .
there is not much of a scientific argument! there is the chemistry of self replicating molecules, and there is the claim that some (evolved? created ?) magician did - it - by - mysterious - magic. one version is a scientific hypothesis, the other is a children’s fairy story !
for example, as soon as you say ‘god x’ is non - physical, you’ve proposed a being that can’t be quantified, tested, or perceived even in principle. you literally have nothing to work with. when trying to justify non - physical entities people will often point out that we can’t see the wind but we still know it’s there .
if jesus existed he sure as hell didn’t have blond hair and blue eyes.
the god who was n't there is a 2005 independent documentary written and directed by brian flemming . the documentary questions the existence of jesus , examining evidence that supports the christ myth theory against the existence of a historical jesus , as well as other aspects of christianity . 
the god who wasn't there is a 2005 independent documentary written and directed by brian flemming. the documentary questions the existence of jesus, examining evidence that supports the christ myth theory against the existence of a historical jesus, as well as other aspects of christianity.
the god who wasn't there is a 2005 independent documentary written and directed by brian flemming. the documentary questions the existence of jesus, examining evidence that supports the christ myth theory against the existence of a historical jesus, as well as other aspects of christianity.