Let's Present Some Evidence ...

[Atheologian]

In a few decades, we'll be studying Jesus in mythology

 

[Willamena]

In a few decades, we'll be studying Jesus in mythology

We already do.

 

[Atheologian]

In what way?

Are you kidding me? You do realize that Zeus and the other GREEK GODS wer once worshipped by all the seprate nations of Greece, as well as many other countries?

 

[Atheologian]

Asking how mythology relates to the study of ancient religion is like asking how taxidermy is related to skinning animals.

 

[Atheologian]

Mythology IS the study of ancient religion.

 

[Atheologian]

Anyway we got off topic i think...

 

[Willamena]

Jesus has been studied in mythology since (at least) the time of Irenaeus and Justin Martyr (1st - 2nd Century AD).

 

[Atheologian]

that depends on where you live.

 

[Atheologian]

and, like I said, we are way off topic.

 

[Atheologian]

The point is people asking or offerring proof of God are missing the point of this topic, i think

 

[Atheologian]

The topic says "evidence", and that is far more debatable.

 

[Willamena]

The point is people asking or offerring proof of God are missing the point of this topic, i think

That I can agree with (though no doubt it's a different point than the one meant).

 

[Atheologian]

also, I think i understand what PureX meant, when he asked me what I had to offer.

 

[Atheologian]

Athiests can't offer anything but knowledge, and that is evidence in itself

 

[Willamena]

By the way, this isn't a chat. It's okay to more than one thought in a single post and not take up so much room.

 

[Atheologian]

I think where deists and theists look for meaning, they could find knowledge equally rewarding.

 

[Atheologian]

By the way, this isn't a chat. It's okay to more than one thought in a single post and not take up so much room.

I'm used to faster posting, sorry about that.

Can't say I've ever chatted though...

 

[Copernicus]

Yes, but while consciousness persists, it matters. Or do you think that we should act as if it did not?

It matters, but no more than does God, love, beauty, and justice. And keep in mind, too, that "truth" is not something we can perceive except in a limited and relative way. So I would say that honesty is really the more important pursuit. Those aspects of us that you're calling "real" are just physical. And unconscious physicality just isn't very important in any way that I can see.

Really? I don't know you, but I suspect that you avoid walking into walls and stepping off of cliffs. Well, you've survived physical reality long enough to argue against it in these posts anyway.

You're falling back into the trap of labeling God as an "imaginary being". "God" is a complex concept that very often does not include any imaginary beings, and even when it does, is coupled with the awareness that this is just an intellectual mechanism. It's an idealized image that people find momentarily helpful.

I disagree. I think that most believers take the existence of their gods quite seriously, not just as mental abstractions. I call God "imaginary", because I think that they are mistaken to think him anything other than a mental abstraction. You, on the other hand, seem to have fallen into the trap of confusing the model with that which the model represents.

Whatever will be, will be. All I have right now of reality is what I can perceive of it.

Your tautologies are as profound and meaningful as tautologies usually are.

 

[Atheologian]

I think that what most people consider "feeling the presence" of God, or, as Tim Haggard put it, "feeling the presents of God", is no more than chemical reactions in the brain, caused by hormones, liptids and endorphins.

 

[Atheologian]

Really? I don't know you, but I suspect that you avoid walking into walls and stepping off of cliffs. Well, you've survived physical reality long enough to argue against it in these posts anyway.



I disagree. I think that most believers take the existence of their gods quite seriously, not just as mental abstractions. I call God "imaginary", because I think that they are mistaken to think him anything other than a mental abstraction. You, on the other hand, seem to have fallen into the trap of confusing the model with that which the model represents.



Your tautologies are as profound and meaningful as tautologies usually are.

I totally agree. tautologies usually are profound He's also right about most people taking religion VERY seriously and quite literaly. Being an exception to the rule, you should understand that PureX.