Wednesday, March 15, 2017


On
secular Outpost in the last couple of days (3/15/17)  just look at the sheer unreasoning hate, nt in the original post which is reasonable, although I disagree iwth it but in the comment section,


http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2017/03/12/christian-worldview-part-1-worldviews/#disqus_thread




    • Avatar
      > NOT a relationship with Jesus
      How do you have a relationship with a fictional character who would be long dead if he existed at all?
        • Avatar
          that is begging the question, your assertion that he's fictional is unsupported.
            • Avatar
              Any assertion that he is real is unsupported. Are you actually this stupid?
                • Avatar
                  Is that your big evidence telling people who disagree they are stupid?,Hey stupid have you noticed all encyclopedias say Jesus existed?is that because they are stupid?
                  the vast majority of historians think Carrier is an obscure idiot and they knkow Jesus existed, its considered historical fact that has not changed. You are not a historian. you have stuck your head into a black hole called new atheism it;s an ideological camp. You are looking at the evidence through their ideological lens, you are brain washed,
                    • Avatar
                      "its considered historical fact that has not changed."
                      NO idiot, it is NOT, no matte how much you cry and scream otherwise. Lying to yourself won't help you. It's got nothing to do with 'new atheism" you moron, it's got to do with the FACT there is NO EVIDENCE he existed. Your pathetic childish whining and strawman bullshit only makes you look like a whiny 12 year old.
                      "Is that your big evidence telling people who disagree they are stupid?'
                      Speaking of strawmen. I never said that. Can you not read, or are you just a dishonest bitch? Again, it has NOTHING to do with "disagreeing", it has to do with the FACT there is NO EVIDENCE for this person actually existing. NONE. There are NO first hand accounts, no evidence. None. Trying misdirection with strawman and you just being a dishonest little whiner won't change that fact. Cry all you like, but at least TRY and not be a dishonest bullshit artist to cover your butthurt. You can';t list any evidence, because there ISN'T any. THis is a fact, not an opinion. Even those who "believe" he "probably" existed aren't stupid enough to try claiming his existence is a "fact'. WHat a moron
                        • Avatar
                          wow that's so mature. Calling people names man that proves it, you must be right. Most of us outgrew that level of childishness in third grade. I wont bother to make rational arguments to you but if we can't trust the objectivity of religious scholars because they are biased by their beliefs how much less should be trust such a childish Trump-like fool who is passionate about his ignorance.
                          Really with your bigoted stupidity and childish behavior you could work as a bouncer at Trump towers. You're mentality fits with Trump's.
                            • Avatar
                              FFS, are you actually this stupid? I called out your bullshit and pointed out facts, and all you focus on is me pointing out what an idiot you clearly are? Christ, can you cry like a bitch any more? ALL you do is make claims and whine like a 5 year old girl. I point out facts, and you whine about anything except the points I made. Since, you know, you have NO EVIDENCE for ANY of your idiotic claims. You can cry and whinge as much as you like, the fact remains, you've got NOTHING. :)
                                • Avatar
                                  you have no facts nor are you intellectually capable of assessing facts,I will not waste my time., you are a dunce.
                                    • Avatar
                                      Child, YOU are the one with "no facts", this is obvious. All you have done is make claim after claim, all while failing to support any of them. You're embarrassing yourself. Constantly WHINING and pretending to be something you are clearly NOT does not impress anyone child. I don't give a shit about "your time", YOU are the idiot who keeps making unsupported claims, and whining more when people point out you have nothing. Instead of supporting your claims, all you do is whine even more, and try to pretend to have any kind of intellectual superiority. You're just SAD child. If anyone is a "dunce", it's the IDIOT constantly making assertions that fly in the face of all evidence, and frankly, acting like a whiny child. Do grow up.
                                        • Avatar
                                          Actually Joe, not wishing to overly interfere in this 'debate', you keep referring to some facts you have, and I think you've mentioned a book from time to time?
                                          Just give a flavour perhaps of the compelling factual evidence you have, so at least we can test your assertions.
                                            • Avatar
                                              I linked to my book. That was in regard to belief in God not the specific question of historical Jesus,link is up there
                                                • Avatar
                                                  At a very non-theological level I would concede that there is, just possibly, some small evidence for an actual person that may form the basis of the Jesus fables. There is, however, no evidence for any kind of god; quite the reverse in fact.
                                                    • Avatar
                                                      sorry that;s wrong,it's also begging the question ,I am saying my book offers unique evidence for God that is not normally known to apologetic. and you ca't assert there's no evidence as a refutation of my claims without having read the book.
                                                        • Avatar
                                                          If I had a pound for every apologist who assures us he has 'new' evidence proving god, I'd be wealthy. Just watch Matt Dillahunty on Atheist Experience to see what I mean.
                                                          As with the foolish creationist claims that they have fantastic evidence to refute evolution, but which never receive a single proper peer review (let alone a Nobel Prize), so I see your book is not changing any minds. However, I'm conscious that I'm treading old ground, and that I'm probably in danger of derailing the thread so I'll leave it there.
                                                            • Avatar
                                                              I'm a Ph.d.d candidate in history of ideas in secular State university, I am quasi Darwinian not a creationist, and i was a communist and an atheist so I've heard the bull shit before,bull shit on both sides.
                                                              the evidence I have that is knew is avast body of quantitative work from peer reviewed journals in psychology dealing with religious experience, You go find me a christian apologist pushing that material and I'll apologize, you can't because i knw all apologists who have and there are only a couple in 50 years,
                                                • Avatar
                                                  o wow that proves it. you called me names so you must be right! I never thought of calling the other guys names before. what a genius! Of course I said it's accepted as historical fact. I don't need to prove Jesus existed with any independent evidence about him. All need to prove is that history records him as existing that's what we mean by "fact." Historical facts are those facts regarded as factual by historians, one of them is the existence of Jesus as aman in history.
                                                  How do I know? Because I'm a historian and you are not. that means the historical Jesus has presumption, you have to overturn presumption, that means I don't have to prove he existed ,you have to prove he did not.
                                                  And another thing your little myther idiots have created their false academia because you can't compete with real academics. The standards that real historians work by rule out the myther crap,You have invent your own set of standards. If we did history by myther standards we would know nothing.
                                                    • Avatar
                                                      "o wow that proves it. you called me names so you must be right! I never thought of calling the other guys names before. what a genius!"
                                                      You did that in your last post, you utter moron. Christ, it's like you get dumber with each post. Also, I actually pointed out FACTS, whereas all you did was make CLAIMS. Gee, not hard to tell who has an actual leg to stand on, eh? :)
                                                      "All need to prove is that history records him as existing that's what we mean by "fact." '
                                                      No, it doesn't. , you poor deluded whiny bitch. and whining about 'names" when you went and did the SAME thing just highlights what a hypocritical whiny bitch you are. Again, NO EVIDENCE. His existence is NOT fact, no matter how desperately you pretend. And I laugh at your claim of being a 'historian", when no historian would claim his existence a s "fact". Seriously child, at least TRY to not make a complete embarrassment of yourself. :)
                                                      YOu can whine about "presumption" all you wnt, presuming is NOT EVIDENCE> Love how all you do is whine and cry like a bitch, instead of try and actually defend your claims. Since, you know, you CAN'T. :)
                                                  • Avatar
                                                    > the vast majority of historians think Carrier is an obscure idiot
                                                    The vast majority of historians that even care about such myths work in religious 'schools' where they have to agree to bullshit like this to continue working. That is proof of the falsity of their claims.
                                                      • Avatar
                                                        that's bull shit. A lot of people who teach in religious schools are not believers or don't agree with the school,. To dogmatically reject their view just because of that mere affiliation means that we should be less willing to listen to atheists not more. If Being employed by a religious school means we can 't accept their objectivity then being an ideologue in an atheist movement is just the sane as being an extremist hot head and not to be trusted.
                                                        then to make these bigoted statements calling people names that proves my point. you are just a bigot who hates religion so you are not objective.
                                                  • Avatar
                                                    Unsupported except by the evidence. But feel free to do what no one has done for 2,000 years - come up with evidence he existed.
                                                      • Avatar
                                                        Jim so is it your claim that for 2000 years no historian anywhere has provided evidence Jesus existed?
                                                        Care to site the "evidence" which shows Jesus did not exist.
                                                          • Avatar
                                                            There is strong academic support for both a mythological Jesus, for example Richard Carrier, and there is support for there being a real, underlying, individual on which the person we now refer to as Jesus is based (for example, Bart Ehrman). Neither side is regarded as being seriously cranky in their views.
                                                            Personally I don't think it matters. It's highly unlikely that the myth vs real is ever going to be settled to a high level of probability, but nor does it matter. There is little doubt in the minds of most that pretty well none of the events ascribed to Jesus took place, that there were never any miracles, and no divinity attaching.
                                                              • Avatar
                                                                I am sorry that you are taken in by Carrier's petulant childish act. He has nothing,his arguments are crap. you are going by the view in the new atheist movement, real historians think carrier is an idiot, New atheism has it's own academia.
                                                                  • Avatar
                                                                    There's a cultural tradition in western society that has lulled us into the almost immutable belief that Jesus existed. I think there's been an almost propaganda type desire to perpetuate it, led by Christians but fuelled by non-believers who don't want to overly offend; accommodationism if you like.
                                                                    The possibility of Jesus being entirely mythical is finally being viewed seriously. I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable to be able to offer an opinion, but I can say absolutely that Carrier is a serious academic, (he does sometimes appear petulant and childish in his social networking, I'd agree), who is peer reviewed, and cannot be dismissed lightly.
                                                                      • Avatar
                                                                        that is nonsense. When I tried to get the chair of my doctoral committee and the pro I TAed for to comment on 
                                                                        Doherty they called him an idiot and said you can't do history that way. They were atheists and it was a secular program University of Texas.
                                                                        If you study the 19th century figures like Bauer you might see why real historians have soured on mytherism. Essentially all myther argument require conspiracy theories to work.

                                                          No comments: