Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.

10 votes

IS THERE EVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANITY???

Started by shadowhawk , Sep 30 2013 09:06 PM

christianity religion spirituality

This topic is locked

1818 replies to this topic

#781 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 23 April 2014 - 01:07 AM

THE FIRST SECTION SUMMAEY, IS THERE A GOD?
http://www.longecity...600#entry647448
============================================

#782 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 23 April 2014 - 09:01 PM

PART 3 EVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANITY

We have argued for the existence of God, Which God and now Christianity. I am going to continue with the Passion of Christ.

EVIDENCE OF SWEATING BLOOD.

Two of the Gospel eyewitnesses (Luke and John) provide details of the Passion Week incredulous to the first readers of their accounts. Centuries later, when our understanding of human biology improved, these observations finally made sense. Luke, for example, describes the scene in the Garden of Gethsemane in which Jesus prayed prior to being taken captive:

Luke 22:41-44
And He withdrew from them about a stone’s throw, and He knelt down and began to pray, saying, “Father, if You are willing, remove this cup from Me; yet not My will, but Yours be done.” Now an angel from heaven appeared to Him, strengthening Him. And being in agony He was praying very fervently; and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground.

In the last line of this passage, we have a rather incredulous description of Jesus sweating drops of blood. It appears this was confusing for the first readers of Scripture as well; the Church Fathers weren’t quite sure what to make of it in their own writings. Many treated the line as poetic license on the part of Luke. Justin Martyr, when describing the verse in his own teaching, typically omitted this line altogether. The readers of the ancient world struggled to make sense of Luke’s description because they had never seen anything like this in their own personal experience. Today we understand the rare hidden science behind Luke’s observation. As Dr. Joseph Bergeron describes, “Psychogenic (fear induced) Hematidrosis has been observed in a handful of reported cases from fear of impending physical harm. Most of these reported cases were in individuals just prior to execution.” Luke’s report of Jesus sweating blood was not poetry; it was simply an example of hidden science lending credibility to the original observation. It’s unlikely the Luke would invent an unexplainable detail if he wanted the story to seem reasonable to the first hearers.

#783 addx

Guest
711 posts
184 ₮

Location:croatia
NO

Posted 24 April 2014 - 05:07 PM

So, Jesus being the Son of God and hurling into his embrace, knowing what will happen is so scared of what will happen(death) that he sweats blood.

This has been reported in only a handful of cases putting Jesus in the same group with the biggest cowards on earth who in fact were forcibly executed. What was Jesus exactly that afraid of? His execution was his own doing, he predicted it days before, or so it is written. He was hurling into his Fathers embrace, what was he afraid of THAT much that he sweat blood?

Losing his life? He has an eternal soul, he's the son of God?

Yes, I'm sure there's an explanation for that as well. If nothing "God put that there to test us!" always works.

I'm also quite sure when inventing religion one takes care not to "overinvent".

Turning water into wine and raising dead people then must be easily explainable...

After explaining that I'm sure that explaining sweating blood is quite an undertaking.

Good going. Please continue with your proof of atheism.

Edited by addx, 24 April 2014 - 05:08 PM.

#784 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 24 April 2014 - 06:31 PM

When you are so afraid, that you sweat blood, we will see if you have the right to call anyone a coward. Christ, despite this also carried on with His task. That takes great courage. LE3TS SEE YOU DO IT.

Edited by shadowhawk, 24 April 2014 - 07:15 PM.

#785 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 24 April 2014 - 06:42 PM

John also includes an incredulous detail in his description of Jesus on the cross:

John 19:31-34
"The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water."

John, a simple fisherman, described the activity of the soldier and said water poured from Jesus’ side when pierced by the soldier. While an ancient fictional account of such an event might include the appearance of blood pouring from Jesus’ side, John included water without any attempt to clarify or explain his comment. His observation was confusing to his first readers. In fact, the early Church Fathers again struggled to make sense of this claim. Tertullian, Augustine, Cyril and Jerome suggested John was referring allegorically to the baptism of Jesus, water regeneration, or the testimony of the Holy Spirit. Today we understand the hidden medical science explaining the existence of water in Jesus’ body cavity. Anyone beaten as badly as Jesus in the hours prior to his crucifixion would surely have suffered circulatory shock and heart failure. When this happens, pericardial or pleural effusion typically results. Water begins to form around the heart or in the lungs. If this happened to Jesus, water would pour from his body if the soldier’s spear entered into either of these two regions. John’s report of water was not allegory; it was simply another example of hidden science lending credibility to the original observation. It’s unlikely John would invent an unexplainable detail if he wanted the story to seem reasonable to the first hearers.

The findings of science now explain the observations of the Gospel eyewitnesses; they’ve become even more credible now that their seemingly incredulous testimony has been explained much later in history.

Edited by shadowhawk, 24 April 2014 - 06:44 PM.

#786 addx

Guest
711 posts
184 ₮

Location:croatia
NO

Posted 24 April 2014 - 06:53 PM

You're just proving he was a person more and more.

A Son of God would be serene.

He was a person with a great idea and he sacrificed himself for it. Honour that for what it is. We're all children of God, which is probably what he was saying all along. They made up the crap around it and invented a religion. He in fact did not have much directions for mankind except 2 commandments of love. While the religion that spawned from this was fully armed with arbitrary rules, robes, hierarchy, cathechism and whatnot. I don't respect the crap tha spawned. And I don't respect people telling me he was a God.

And then go on to tell me he died(a god dies?) and resurrected(where was he in the meantime?) and turned water into wine and what not. I don't care for that. I infact think it doesn't do him justice.

like x 1

#787 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 24 April 2014 - 07:34 PM

You're just proving he was a person more and more.

A Son of God would be serene.

He was a person with a great idea and he sacrificed himself for it. Honour that for what it is. We're all children of God, which is probably what he was saying all along. They made up the crap around it and invented a religion. He in fact did not have much directions for mankind except 2 commandments of love. While the religion that spawned from this was fully armed with arbitrary rules, robes, hierarchy, cathechism and whatnot. I don't respect the crap tha spawned. And I don't respect people telling me he was a God.

And then go on to tell me he died(a god dies?) and resurrected(where was he in the meantime?) and turned water into wine and what not. I don't care for that. I infact think it doesn't do him justice.

You don’t know about the incarnation? He is God and man as the creed says:

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the Father before all ages, Light of Light, True God of True God, Begotten, not made, of one essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made:
Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man;
And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried;
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures;
And ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of the Father;
And He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke by the Prophets;
And I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins.
I look for the Resurrection of the dead,
And the Life of the age to come. Amen.

Edited by shadowhawk, 24 April 2014 - 07:35 PM.

#788 addx

Guest
711 posts
184 ₮

Location:croatia
NO

Posted 24 April 2014 - 08:40 PM

You're just proving he was a person more and more.

A Son of God would be serene.

He was a person with a great idea and he sacrificed himself for it. Honour that for what it is. We're all children of God, which is probably what he was saying all along. They made up the crap around it and invented a religion. He in fact did not have much directions for mankind except 2 commandments of love. While the religion that spawned from this was fully armed with arbitrary rules, robes, hierarchy, cathechism and whatnot. I don't respect the crap tha spawned. And I don't respect people telling me he was a God.

And then go on to tell me he died(a god dies?) and resurrected(where was he in the meantime?) and turned water into wine and what not. I don't care for that. I infact think it doesn't do him justice.
You dont know about the incarnation? He is God and man as the creed says:

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the Father before all ages, Light of Light, True God of True God, Begotten, not made, of one essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made:
Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man;
And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried;
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures;
And ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of the Father;
And He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke by the Prophets;
And I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins.
I look for the Resurrection of the dead,
And the Life of the age to come. Amen.

Geez, aren't you one brainwashed mofo.

I obviously know it all, I told you I have all sacraments and went every saturday to cathechism school. How would I know of his 2 commandments.

I'm just messing with you. Because you're trying to be all scientific about God being beyond the universe, immortal, forever, boundless and then all of a sudden he can die and resurrect. I mean wtf, that's just a show then, if he's really immortal boundless or what not. There's all kinds paths you can argument from here. You can say that Jesus was a Son of God, a man, but of God, whatever, kinda combination, I'm not going there, just so you know. You can say whatever you want like that. So, it doesnt add up, your scientific explanation and the crap you sell here. It's not working together.

#789 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:57 PM

addx: Geez, aren't you one brainwashed mofo.

I obviously know it all, I told you I have all sacraments and went every saturday to cathechism school. How would I know of his 2 commandments. SH: I don't know. Did any of it stick?

I'm just messing with you. Because you're trying to be all scientific about God being beyond the universe, immortal, forever, boundless and then all of a sudden he can die and resurrect. I mean wtf, that's just a show then, if he's really immortal boundless or what not. There's all kinds paths you can argument from here. You can say that Jesus was a Son of God, a man, but of God, whatever, kinda combination, I'm not going there, just so you know. SH: No you are going to try to derail the topic by being rude and crude. Typical. You can say whatever you want like that. So, it doesnt add up, your scientific explanation and the crap you sell here. It's not working together. SH: In case you didn't notice, we are not talking about this now.

OK, perhaps you went to catechism. Have a nice day.

Edited by shadowhawk, 24 April 2014 - 09:58 PM.

#790 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 24 April 2014 - 10:55 PM

WHY DID JESUS DIE QUICKLY? jw wallace

Jesus pre-crucifixion experience was unusual given His identity and claims. As we review the chronology prior to the crucifixion, we begin to understand why Jesus died so quickly on the cross:

They Struck Him in the Head
Remember that Jesus was delivered to the cross through the Jewish rulers who abused Him prior to the crucifixion. This wasn’t the case for every victim of crucifixion. Jesus’ treatment started with physical abuse from the onset. When he refused to answer the high priest in the manner they expected, Jesus was struck by an officer:

John 18:21-22
“Why do you question Me? Question those who have heard what I spoke to them; they know what I said.” When He had said this, one of the officers standing nearby struck Jesus, saying, “Is that the way You answer the high priest?”

They Beat Him With Their Fists and Slapped Him in the Face
The physical abuse of Jesus continued based on His claims of Deity. Not every prisoner made these kinds of assertions. Jesus’ claims caused His captors to treat him even more harshly, tormenting and mocking Him both verbally and physically:

Mark 14:65
Some began to spit at Him, and to blindfold Him, and to beat Him with their fists, and to say to Him, “Prophesy!” And the officers received Him with slaps in the face.

They Scourged Him
In another unusual turn of events, Pontius Pilate received Jesus from the Jewish rulers and appeared troubled about sentencing Jesus to crucifixion. In fact, Pilate found nothing worthy of crucifixion and attempted to appease the angry Jewish mob by having Jesus scourged badly:

John 18:38-40, 19:1, 4-6
[Pilate] went out again to the Jews and said to them, “I find no guilt in Him. But you have a custom that I release someone for you at the Passover; do you wish then that I release for you the King of the Jews?” So they cried out again, saying, “Not this Man, but Barabbas.” Now Barabbas was a robber. Pilate then took Jesus and scourged Him… Pilate came out again and said to them, “Behold, I am bringing Him out to you so that you may know that I find no guilt in Him.” Jesus then came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, “Behold, the Man!” So when the chief priests and the officers saw Him, they cried out saying, “Crucify, crucify!” Pilate said to them, “Take Him yourselves and crucify Him, for I find no guilt in Him.”

Pilate scourged Jesus violently in an effort to pacify a crowd that wanted to kill Jesus. The level and depth of Jesus’ scourging was likely severe enough to appeal to the crowds desires. Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ likely captured the brutality of the whipping. A Roman scourge (called a “flagrum”) was typically a multi-stranded whip or lash containing bits and pieces of stone or bone in the lash tips. A beating with a Roman scourge left victims bloody and severely injured. Given Pilate’s desire to appease the Jewish crowd calling for Jesus’ death, he subjected Jesus to a brutal beating just short of a death sentence. Jesus was likely scourged to within an inch of His life.

They Beat Him in the Head With A Reed
Following the scourging, the soldiers continued to mock Jesus and torment Him physically. They pushed a crown of thorns on his head and eventually beat Him with a reed:

Matthew 27:30
And after weaving a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand; and they kneeled down before Him and mocked Him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews! And they spat on Him, and took the reed and began to beat Him on the head.

They Forced Him to Carry His Cross
Jesus was now injured dramatically, yet the Roman soldiers demanded He carry His cross to the site of the crucifixion in spite of his condition. He clearly was unable to accomplish the task, given what He suffered. As a result, Simon of Cyrene was pressed into service to help Jesus carry the cross:

Matthew 27:32
And as they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross.

They Crucified Him
Jesus was then crucified alongside the two criminals. His path to the cross was very different than theirs, however. His pre-crucifixion beatings were driven by factors unique to Jesus’ identity and assertions:

Matthew 27:32
And when they had crucified Him, they divided up His garments among themselves by casting lots. And sitting down, they began to keep watch over Him there. And above His head they put up the charge against Him which read, “THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

Jesus suffered a significant and unique beating prior to His crucifixion. Anyone beaten as badly as Jesus in the hours prior to his crucifixion would surely have suffered circulatory shock and heart failure in a short period of time on the cross. In fact, the evidence of John’s observations related to water pouring from Jesus’ side when stabbed by the soldier (John 19:31-34) are consistent with this form of death. Jesus died more quickly than other crucifixion victims because of his unique pre-crucifixion experience. As a result, his early death is reasonable and expected. We can be confident Jesus died on the cross and was truly resurrected rather than resuscitated.

DukeNukem said this was no big deal, he would even be willing to do it for the benefits.

"Also, it's not much of a sacrifice when you get to come back to life a few days later. lol Big fucking whoop! I wouldn't care much about dying either -- even painfully -- if I knew the reward was coming back essentially as a god three days later. Jesus didn't sacrifice himself at all. Hell, practically any of us would have signed on for that deal. His so-called sacrifice for us is the biggest non-sacrifice in the history of human fiction."

http://www.longecity...-23#entry652433

Edited by shadowhawk, 24 April 2014 - 11:12 PM.

#791 addx

Guest
711 posts
184 ₮

Location:croatia
NO

Posted 25 April 2014 - 07:25 AM

addx: Geez, aren't you one brainwashed mofo.

I obviously know it all, I told you I have all sacraments and went every saturday to cathechism school. How would I know of his 2 commandments. SH: I don't know. Did any of it stick?

I'm just messing with you. Because you're trying to be all scientific about God being beyond the universe, immortal, forever, boundless and then all of a sudden he can die and resurrect. I mean wtf, that's just a show then, if he's really immortal boundless or what not. There's all kinds paths you can argument from here. You can say that Jesus was a Son of God, a man, but of God, whatever, kinda combination, I'm not going there, just so you know. SH: No you are going to try to derail the topic by being rude and crude. Typical. You can say whatever you want like that. So, it doesnt add up, your scientific explanation and the crap you sell here. It's not working together. SH: In case you didn't notice, we are not talking about this now.

OK, perhaps you went to catechism. Have a nice day.

Yes I did, I live in one of the most roman catholic countries in the world. The country that held the european border against ottoman(muslim) empire. The country that borders with orthodox catholics)serbia). The country that borders with the only muslim country in europe(bosnia).

So I know all about religion. I know all about theism, about all of it. I even had a long time muslim girlfriend so I know all about that too. This area where I live has been in constant 3-theist(muslim vs. roman catholic vs. orthodoc catholic) warfare for centuries. Look at some history of it. People have raped, slaughtered and murdered in the name of 3 Gods forever here. Saints were spawned here, the Pope came here a number of times. Emirates and other muslim empires are investing huge money in Bosnia, actually paying women to wear headscarfs in the name Allah(they can actually live off the pay). Religious stakes here are enormous.

So, I think I have a much clearer picture of the effect of religion than you. My grandfathers house in bosnia was torn down by orthodox catholics just 20 years ago, my family is in croatia so my grandfather took refuge with us. My father-in-law was captured and tortured by orthodox catholics in bosnia, fortunately he managed to survive until prisoner exchange.

I grew up and still live amongst all the religious and national hate and warfare. It's hate that you couldn't imagine. And it's in the middle of europe, neighbouring with Italy and Vatican.

So, considering all that, I'm quite A-THEIST and I'm not being rude and crude, I'm being nice.

And to answer your wrongly posted question of the thread:

There is evidence for christianity. Just fly to Croatia or Bosnia. You can still see plenty of burned down houses, destroyed churches, bombed out schools. They're still digging up mass tombs. There's still hundrends of unfound bodies. There's religious hate everywhere. All in the name of God.

So, christianity is very much evident.... God, however, is not, not in the least.

Edited by addx, 25 April 2014 - 07:50 AM.

#792 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 25 April 2014 - 07:46 PM

The mess in the Baltics started long before Christianity. Atheism and Fascism didn’t do so well either. Are you blaming all this pain on the crucified Christ? Did God tell you all to behave this way? Not Christianity. We suffered also.

#793 addx

Guest
711 posts
184 ₮

Location:croatia
NO

Posted 25 April 2014 - 09:23 PM

Baltic is not balkan, it's very far apart.

And no, it was always very religious, don't tell me what's what, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

You don't know the heritage of the country that held the border against the turk onslaught for centuries. Centuries!!!

For example, after centuries under turks(ottoman empire), when finally liberated, serbs burned down ALL the mosques in their country immediately and returned to almost 100% orthodox catholic!!!!

You think you're familiar with that "energy" with that "vibe". You know shit.

Edited by addx, 25 April 2014 - 09:26 PM.

#794 platypus

Guest
2,386 posts
240 ₮

Location:Italy

Posted 25 April 2014 - 10:25 PM

How come other religions "work" exactly equally well for the believers? Why is that? Satan is deceiving people? :D

#795 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 25 April 2014 - 11:37 PM

How come other religions "work" exactly equally well for the believers? Why is that? Satan is deceiving people? :D

They don't work exactly the same. We have already gone over that in WHICH ONE..

DukeNukem said this was no big deal, he would even be willing to do it for the benefits.

Edited by shadowhawk, 25 April 2014 - 11:45 PM.

#796 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 26 April 2014 - 12:23 AM

Baltic is not balkan, it's very far apart.

And no, it was always very religious, don't tell me what's what, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

You don't know the heritage of the country that held the border against the turk onslaught for centuries. Centuries!!!

For example, after centuries under turks(ottoman empire), when finally liberated, serbs burned down ALL the mosques in their country immediately and returned to almost 100% orthodox catholic!!!!

You think you're familiar with that "energy" with that "vibe". You know shit.

Christians long suffered under Islam. Devsirme (literally collecting in Turkish) was chiefly the practice by which the Ottoman Empire took slave boys from their Balkan Christian families once every four to five years. They were then converted to Islam with the primary objective of selecting and training the ablest children for the military or civil service of the Empire.

The Janissaries as they were called, became the first Ottoman standing army replacing forces that mostly consisted of tribal warriors (ghazis) whose loyalty and morale were not always guaranteed. Christians often ended up fighting their own children.

Even back before written history, this area has always had trouble, because it is a crossroad for human migration. But this is all off topic. Again, Christians also suffered.

#797 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 26 April 2014 - 02:24 AM

TIMELINE OF THE WEEK OF THE PASSOVER FEAST..

http://www.jesusfirs...es/timeline.pdf

#798 addx

Guest
711 posts
184 ₮

Location:croatia
NO

Posted 26 April 2014 - 03:53 PM

Baltic is not balkan, it's very far apart.

And no, it was always very religious, don't tell me what's what, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

You don't know the heritage of the country that held the border against the turk onslaught for centuries. Centuries!!!

For example, after centuries under turks(ottoman empire), when finally liberated, serbs burned down ALL the mosques in their country immediately and returned to almost 100% orthodox catholic!!!!

You think you're familiar with that "energy" with that "vibe". You know shit.

Christians long suffered under Islam. Devsirme (literally collecting in Turkish) was chiefly the practice by which the Ottoman Empire took slave boys from their Balkan Christian families once every four to five years. They were then converted to Islam with the primary objective of selecting and training the ablest children for the military or civil service of the Empire.

The Janissaries as they were called, became the first Ottoman standing army replacing forces that mostly consisted of tribal warriors (ghazis) whose loyalty and morale were not always guaranteed. Christians often ended up fighting their own children.

Even back before written history, this area has always had trouble, because it is a crossroad for human migration. But this is all off topic. Again, Christians also suffered.

It's not off topic

I LIVE in a 3 theistic area.

I LIVE in an area that has been subjected to RELIGIOUS warfare for centuries.

It was the borderline of western civilisation and christianity against eastern civilisation and islam. For centuries.

USA has a "beef" with islam, but that's across the world and just a few countries involved.

At that time, ALL THE KNOWN WORLD was involved in basically a single focused struggle of christianity vs. islam, on a focused territory the size of a USA state, and it lasted for centuries.

You have no idea of the extreme religious heritage and don't presume you can get it from googling silly facts.

I don't know where that spelling comes from but for example it is pronounced Yanyeecharee or something to that effect.

Furthermore, at that time, there was really little difference between the two worlds. There was nothing good about christianity at that time. It was the dark ages and in fact the ottoman empire was not that bad. They had laws, you could practice your own religion under them but you were officially a 2nd class citizen, but your rights were still protected by laws. Compared to catholic church burning single women for witchcraft, corrupting, fornicating and sending armies to "holy ground" to rape and plunder, they were not really such bad guys. They had culture and most countries they invaded were more lawless before them.

And its not off topic.

You're here telling bed night stories about jesus. Pretending you know stuff. You know the gospel. You don't know anything real.

I'm here telling the real historic documented effect of religion, effect which I feel even now.

Do you know how it was for mixed marriages when the war broke out? For friendships? Yugoslavia size is less than one american state, and you have 3 theist religions with extreme tradition, heritage and history, people have died here for them, ancestors, hate goes deep and its religiously based.

This is a documented and obvious effect of theistic religions.

Americans look at islam like some backwards countries and people across the world with lots of oil money.

Bosnia is a country where people are "normal". They don't walk around in white robes. They are "european" muslims. They honour islam, but they pass off as westerners, you would never tell. It has all mixed here because of that. They're not some country half way around the world, they're your next door neighbour. You kid falls in love, because we're all the same, we look like MTV kids, we just go to different temples. And then something happens, and all of a sudden there's war and all those people are killing each other because of different temples. Your parents don't want to see you because you married a different religion, the other parents as well. Your kid is insulted at school because you live in an area where're you're a minority. But only 15 miles further you'd be a majority.

You never witnessed that, you never lived in that. And don't presume you could ever imagine it and don't offend me by telling me what's what here and googling crap.

This is also why communism had great effect here after world war 2. It was the only possible way to get all these people to live in a single country, by abolishing all religion completely. But after decades of communism religion came back stronger than ever in the civil war that brought down Yugoslavia. I think more mosques were built in Bosnia after the war ended than in the entire history of the country. Croats and serbs also increased religious fundamentalism and wages war under the flags of their religions.

My experience is very relevant to this topic. You just want to limit my freedom of speech. You're advocating religion. I have good argument, I have a valid point, considering my experience. You're here giving all the positive points about religion. And I'm here with quite an opposite real life experience. So, explain it.

Since your evidence for christianity is not really anything tangible but simple some logical crap, a bunch of arguments building on each other like a pile of shit. An elaborate persuasion. My evidence is tangible. Religion as a system has no evidence to support the supposed benefits it provides. But its existence as a side-effect has caused so much death and warfare through history. Even the supposedly helpful aspects of christianity like children shelters are plagued with child abuse and have always been.

So, you have no evidence for anything. You promise the afterlife and whatnot. But in fact we get war, rape, hate, pedophilia, burning witches, burning scientists and plunder.

As advice, all we get out of christianity is "turn the other cheek", "god will reward the meek" etc. Its like they made a "deal with the devil", they persuade everyone to be meek and them some bad guys swoop in and do whatever they want to the meek. And then you find out that catholic leaders and the bad guys enjoy the same whorehouse on weekends and buy each other cocaine.

Nothing good promised is really ever confirmed to happen, its in fact designed not to be expected, but simply trusted it will happen. God will reward you... one day (meaning an accident will be attributed to Gods doing)..but most probably in the afterlife.

But the bad things under theistic flags are constant and theres no trust required for them to happen, they happen on a regular basis.

Why am I even explaining this. America basically is in a religious war. Religion is used to get sheep people to wage war and get killed so the wolf people can get oil or whatever. That's it. Afterlife or no afterlife, that's what its used in this life, here on earth, that's all that I can observe, confirm, and testify to. That's all the evidence there is.

The rest of the crap on this topic is just a persuasive argument (for sheep). Just words.

Edited by addx, 26 April 2014 - 03:59 PM.

#799 Jeoshua

Guest
662 posts
186 ₮

Location:North Carolina
NO

Posted 26 April 2014 - 04:24 PM

Actually, addx, the topic here is "Is there evidence for Christianity", and your story, although true and moving, is about the intersection of different religions in a small area, and the effects of hatred between them. At best, it says that being Christian and defending Europe doesn't make you a good person, the reason you aren't Christian, or that religious people can be very dangerous, and not whether or not there is evidence that the stories that Christianity consists of are true... as much as I don't like to agree with someone who I have disagreed with so often, on a thread I disagree with, who is using the same response that they use so often.

The thrust of the first post is actually pretty sketchy. There is certainly evidence for Christianity's existence, but is there evidence FOR Christianity, which given the general usage of "for" and the lack of any real original description of the intent of the thread, and the content of the linked video, the meaning of the thread's title should probably be taken as "Is There Evidence That Christianity Is True"

----

However, Shadowhawk, none of the points recently given are actually proof. They're just examinations of stories from the Bible. At best they prove them plausible, but do not prove that they happened.

This is a crucial difference. I could tell you "I walked 2 miles to the store, on Tuesday, and bought a frozen pizza for $1.99". Examining the evidence from my life of not owning a car, being human and needing to eat, there being a store 2 miles away from my house, that I am in decent enough health with the ability to walk 2 miles, which does have pizzas for $1.99, that I do walk to the store from time to time, and that basically everyone loves pizza, that story would be utterly plausible. This is written down for all to see, in a public forum, it's very specific, it makes sense, and so it definitely could have happened. But it didn't happen. The story is not proof it happened, and despite making sense and being completely plausible, the actual evidence of where I have been on Tuesday would show unequivocally that I wasn't there, that no pizzas were bought by me on that day, and that I haven't actually had pizza in weeks.

This is exactly the same situation of looking through the Bible and examining the plausibility of things that happened. Some of the events of Jesus' life are completely possible to have occurred, like the Money Lenders in the Temple story. Given the information about what kind of man Jesus was in the rest of the book, him flipping over the tables and telling them they were turning a holy place into a place of business, and being really upset about it, it makes complete sense. But just because the Bible says it happened does not constitute proof, it just makes it plausible that IF there was a man named Jesus, and IF he is like described in the rest of the book, and IF he went to the temple, and IF there were money traders there, and IF he wanted to make a point, that something like this COULD HAVE happened. Nothing definitively says that it ever DID happen, because if any of the IF's or COULD HAVE's in there aren't true, then it didn't happen. And we don't exactly have video tape or diaries from the money lenders of that temple that describe an event like this.

The stories of the existence of Jesus as we understand him nowadays are directly taken from the Bible. Therefore, anything from the Bible is immediately suspect as far as evidence goes. One cannot use the original example of something as evidence for it. In Scientific parlance, the Bible is the Hypothesis, not the Conclusion. Any studies done on the Bible that examine the information contained therein can only ascertain its plausibility, not its veracity, which requires independent correlation from outside sources.

More specifically, I will address the story of Jesus and Pontious Pilate. There is evidence that Pontious Pilate existed. He was well known, at the time, in Jerusalem. He even kept major journals about who was executed, being a Roman officiant and therefore being required by his job title to keep track of things like this for the Roman Empire. However, none of his journals actually describe any man named Jesus ever being crucified. Not one of them. None of them describe 3 men being crucified, two of them for theft and one of them for something else. It is possible that Jesus could have been known by another name, or that he was marked up separately, and there are many descriptions of people being crucified for sedition, for disturbing the peace, and many of those were trumped up charges as Jesus's would have been in order to put someone to death for something that wasn't really a crime (being considered a God is not a crime to the Romans, otherwise they would have had to try Caesar for it). But no evidence from Pontious Pilate himself that says "I crucified Jesus on this day". Given the details of the story, of how much effort was put forth to humiliate him, to torture him, and how many people would have had to be involved in that undertaking, you would think there would be some kind of mention in there.

So again, most of the Bible is plausible, so some parts of it could have happened. But people talking about the story of the Bible simply is not evidence that story ever happened.

On the other hand, there is a lot of stuff that is extremely improbable, like the very hand of God, Himself, coming down and writing in the Air, God creating a flood that drowns the entire world and wipes out all of mankind except one family who brings along with it every species of life in a single boat, God creating the Universe and everything in it including mankind in just 7 days, A being who is half-man and half-god born of a virgin who is crucified but comes back to life 3 days later and appears to multiple people at once on that day never to be seen again, or 7 headed goats that rule the world. These stories are very much so not plausible, and what evidence we have of the universe and how it works does not support them. This doesn't mean that they didn't happen, but it further drives home the point that plausibility does not equal evidence.

Edited by Jeoshua, 26 April 2014 - 05:10 PM.

#800 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 26 April 2014 - 08:49 PM

Off topic: I wish Croatia well and though my formal studies have been in History, Philosophy and psychology I am sure you know things about Croatia that I don’t because you Live there. I am sure all the people in your country do not think like you do either because there is a sizable Catholic and Orthodox Christian presence there. You never mention the influence of Atheistic Communism in the mix. What has taken place in your country is deplorable as you know first hand but that has nothing to do with the evidence of Christianity. Again Christians suffered also, if you know history as you claim.
http://www.oxforddic...glish/janissary

Edited by shadowhawk, 26 April 2014 - 08:55 PM.

#801 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 26 April 2014 - 09:22 PM

The claim has been made that none of this is proof of Christianity. I did not use the word “proof” deliberately because Proof is a term of math and logic. In the real world there is no such thing as absolutely proof so powerful that you do not have to use faith. I have evidence but nothing that could defeat a small child who keeps asking “why.” Hard core skepticism, no one lives by. Everyone, operates by faith in the real world. Everything about life turns into History, the same second it ceases to be future. History is part of every one of us. That you started reading this post is now history. And how would we know you even read it? Eye witness testimony as to its contents from your memory of what happened or others seeing you read it. Evidence which must be accepted by faith. If no evidence works, then you could say you read it but I don't believe you. Prove it. It is all history and hearsay.

For a good read on the historical basis of the evidence of the crucifixion I recommend the following books.

WHERE IS HISTORY GOING?
http://www.amazon.co...s/dp/B000O2SKDI

https://www.disciple..._Montgomery.pdf

http://www.amazon.co...NGBY8PATB2HDYQ0

Edited by shadowhawk, 26 April 2014 - 09:42 PM.

#802 Jeoshua

Guest
662 posts
186 ₮

Location:North Carolina
NO

Posted 26 April 2014 - 11:18 PM

You just dodged the point. Expertly, I might add - good show. You know exactly what I meant by "proof". I mean something that shows that what is being shown is not just plausible, but that it actually happened, in history, in a way that most people would be able to immediately accept, and holds up to scrutiny. That's what I mean by "proof", not a mathematical equation (please, let's not go there, eh?. I think you'd agree to that). Also, nobody wants to read a whole book to get this information. Could you post a few selected quotes (that's fully covered under Fair Use laws), or a general synopsis?

Edited by Jeoshua, 26 April 2014 - 11:20 PM.

#803 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 27 April 2014 - 01:23 AM

You just dodged the point. Expertly, I might add - good show. You know exactly what I meant by "proof". I mean something that shows that what is being shown is not just plausible, but that it actually happened, in history, in a way that most people would be able to immediately accept, and holds up to scrutiny. That's what I mean by "proof", not a mathematical equation (please, let's not go there, eh?. I think you'd agree to that). Also, nobody wants to read a whole book to get this information. Could you post a few selected quotes (that's fully covered under Fair Use laws), or a general synopsis?

I didn’t dodge any point. There is a difference between evidence, which most of us run our lives by and proof which skeptics ask for but doesn’t exist except as I have already noted. We are talking about evidence. A historian is interested in the evidence of what actually happened. What evidence does one have? We are not interested in evidence by election either. Who has the most votes? Christians win hands down if that is the case.

It is not the subject for children either. A child can experience the cosmos on a starry night as much as an astronomer. Wow!!! You don’t have to know all to experience God. Just put what faith you have in God and then grow up into the knowledge of God.

I have read thousands of books, watched many videos and listened to tapes and lectures. I average reading about three books a week. It sounds so strange to me, to object to having to read a book. Some here can’t even watch a video! This is your life for pete sakes. You are beyond being a child.

Yes, there are summaries of Christianity, but you are past that I think, and so is this topic. However...

http://www.summaryofchristianity.com/
http://religionretho...ef-summary.html
http://www.creeds.net/

Edited by shadowhawk, 27 April 2014 - 01:33 AM.

#804 Jeoshua

Guest
662 posts
186 ₮

Location:North Carolina
NO

Posted 27 April 2014 - 02:19 AM

(snip)
It is not the subject for children either. A child can experience the cosmos on a starry night as much as an astronomer. Wow!!! You dont have to know all to experience God. Just put what faith you have in God and then grow up into the knowledge of God.

(snip)
You are beyond being a child.

You know, we haven't got along in the past, and I know I led with telling you that I didn't like agreeing with you, and that I'm trying to say that your previous "evidence" is nothing of the kind, and I think you can understand why it is that we haven't had good relations in the past (at least, I hope). Even so, I actually take offense at my comments being likened to that of a child. I thought that coming to a different thread to continue our conversation about what constitutes proof and truth would be helpful, but I now see, very clearly, that you are incapable of actually responding to any point put forth which doesn't fully agree with your goals, in any way which does not involve insulting the poster by throwing mild invectives towards said poster, or claiming that they didn't understand what you were saying.

Edited by Jeoshua, 27 April 2014 - 02:22 AM.

#805 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 27 April 2014 - 02:39 AM

I don't have a low view of children. I still consider myself a learner, like a child. I hope to keep; the wonderment. No offense meant You will have to tell me what historical evidence is because I don't know what you are talking about. You seem to know there is none.

I did give you summaries of what YOU asked for. I thought you didn't want to read a book.

Look at what you have said so far. Not really any evidence that I can see. I hope that does not insult you because it is not meant that way.

This is not about your hurt feelings or mine. Let's go on.

Edited by shadowhawk, 27 April 2014 - 02:48 AM.

#806 Jeoshua

Guest
662 posts
186 ₮

Location:North Carolina
NO

Posted 27 April 2014 - 03:32 AM

No, of course I don't know that there is no evidence, proof, or truth behind the bible anywhere in existence. We've already established, very clearly, that not everything can ever even be known, let alone to one person. I'm not omniscient and am not claiming to be. What I mean is that I have yet to see any hard evidence in this thread, or in my experience, that the stories contained in the Bible are true beyond a reasonable doubt in such a way that stands up to any real scrutiny. By that I mean (and don't think this is a straw-man, it's just an example of the difference, here) that it is like my story in my previous post claiming to have gone to the store and bought a pizza. It fits all the criteria of the "evidence" at the top of this page of Jesus being able to bleed from his skin due to the abuse described in the Bible, any yet my little story about going to the store didn't actually happen, despite being very plausible, and having actually happened several times this year. This isn't disproof of the Bible in any way, but rather a criticism of the admitted plausibility of the story of Jesus's torture story being in any way similar to what I would reasonably expect you were implying, in the title of the thread, by "evidence".

Now, I used to be a Born Again Christian, before that in my childhood a Baptist. As part of my "conversion", if you will, I was made to read the whole Bible, cover to cover, several times. Note, I use "conversion" as a metaphor, because what I actually experienced was more like brainwashing, due to the sleep deprivation, forced communal living, and constant references as everything outside of the Bible and the leaders of the group as potentially "Satanic". Why, when I returned from this experience, I could not even look at a book or a television for even a moment without thinking of Satan and then praying for forgiveness for my "weakness", even if that television was showing the 700 Club (although nowadays I think Pat Robertson might actually be an agent of Satan, whether I believe in his existence or not). I filled my time with reading books written by Saints, and much of the rest of the time in prayer or trying to convert others to being a BAC, as I was told that I had to do or face the fires of hell. Let me tell you, I've done quite enough reading of and about the Bible to fill a lifetime, unless something really special and interesting comes along. Please, feel privileged that I am here talking relatively reasonably to you.

So I have a very good understanding of what is contained within the Bible, even if nowadays I consider most of it to just be poems, songs, vision-quests, or allegories. This doesn't mean that I immediately discount the possibility that they contain some nuggets of truth, because overall I feel that while the Bible teaches some very good lessons in easily understood language, regardless of whether or not it contals actual historical facts.

Now, what do I mean by "actual historical facts"? I mean something that actually happened, at some time in the past. A good way to prove this in a way that would constitute evidence, in my mind, would be that there are independently corroborating details found in other historical documents of the time, whose truth may also be able to be verified in a similar fashion.

For the Old Testament, this is extremely difficult, if not impossible. At the putative time of most of the events described, nobody knew how to write anything, at all. The Hebrews didn't even know what written language was until they encountered the Babylonians, and only after making their own writing system were they able to write down the ages-old stories in anything remotely resembling a permanent form. Sure, it is claimed that they memorized everything word-for-word, and passed it on verbatim, and the copies made of the documents were always said to be taken from the oldest possible manuscripts and copied letter for letter - changed not one Iota - but we only have their word for it, and after translation into so many different languages (Ancient Hebrew -> Greek -> Roman -> Olde English -> Modern English), we don't even have an "Iota" anymore, and the better translation into modern language would "not one bit". And, even though that saying is pretty well known, the original text didn't even have the word and/or letter "Iota", and the original words written in the Ancient Hebrew actually said "not one Yod", the smallest letter of the Hebrew Alphabet, which looks a lot like this ---> `
So the very line which says that you can't change anything has been drastically changed. It was all metaphorical, anyways, but nevertheless there has been a drastic shuffling around of Yods over the years. The very sentence in which the Bible claims to never have been changed has, itself, been changed. This is a big reason that the Bible is not a definitive and unequivocal source of truth.

There are stories in the Old Testament which are repeated in other religious texts, which . A good example of this is the Great Flood, which is spoken of in the Epic of Gilgamesh. Unfortunately for the testing of truth in this circumstance, the Hebrew only knew what writing was when they met the Babylonians, the people who originally wrote about Gilgamesh. The timing of their meeting of the Babylonians and their writing down of the Bible are too close to discount the possibility that the Babylonians are the source of the story. Beyond this, many of the other stories that others might have noticed and recorded for posterity left few survivors who could actually attest to its veracity (Sodom & Gomorrah, Jericho, The Garden of Eden, among others).

The New Testament, however, is a vastly different story. This was a time of high civilization, of writing and learned men. The setting and many of the overarching background events described in these stories (other than Revelation) are well known and easily verified. Pontious Pilate existed. Jerusalem was a real place at the time. Golgotha was factually a place of execution for the Romans, who really occupied Jerusalem around 0-30 AD. People were actually crucified. But this all goes to show that the story is actually set in a real location, with (some) characters that can actually be conclusively proven to have really existed. But it doesn't prove, show evidence for, or even do more than merely hint at the possibility, that a Half-Man Half-God born of a virgin was crucified and came back to life at multiple locations at once never to be seen again. And this is the thrust of what I mean by almost all of this evidence having been so-far put forth not constituting "Evidence For Christianty". I doubt you meant information about the setting or the back-story being real, you mean "Jesus Christ, who died for our Sins" etc, etc, and all of that.

Edit: Almost all of my edits are due to the correction of misspelled word-spew.

Edited by Jeoshua, 27 April 2014 - 03:43 AM.

like x 2

#807 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 28 April 2014 - 06:29 PM

This is a clear example of
THE GARBAGE TRUCK FALLACY
1. A. Dumps a pile of issues all at once, so big that it would take B. writing a book to answer them all.
2. A. claims they win the issue when B. can’t or wont answer them.

Sometimes there are so many issues that is impossible to answer them all.
Sometimes there is a general charge about everything. Example, the Bible is unscientific.

We have first an objection to reading a book, and then starting with the old testament we get a whole list of empty (No evidence) charges. I am expected to answer them all and go off the subject of the crucifixion and resurrection. You wont mind if I don’t.

dislike x 1

#808 Jeoshua

Guest
662 posts
186 ₮

Location:North Carolina
NO

Posted 28 April 2014 - 06:35 PM

Argument from fallacy

Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false. It is also called argument to logic (argumentum ad logicam), fallacy fallacy, fallacist's fallacy, and bad reasons fallacy.

Fallacious arguments can arrive at true conclusions, so this is an informal fallacy of relevance.

Further, Argumentum ad logicam can be used as an ad hominem appeal: by impugning the opponent's credibility or good faith it can be used to sway the audience by undermining the speaker, rather than addressing the speaker's argument.

William Lycan identifies the fallacy fallacy as the fallacy "of imputing fallaciousness to a view with which one disagrees but without doing anything to show that the view rests on any error of reasoning", using as examples G. E. Moore's naturalistic fallacy and Ned Block's fallacy of intentionalizing qualia. Unlike ordinary fallacy fallacies, which reason from an argument's fallaciousness to its conclusion's falsehood, the kind of argument Lycan has in mind treats another argument's fallaciousness as obvious without first demonstrating that any fallacy at all is present. Thus in some contexts it may be a form of begging the question.

Let's break it down so you don't have to author a book in response to it, eh? All of them were examples of one major, overarching argument:

For the purposes of your question of there being evidence for Christianity:
The Bible is not Scientific data, but rather a part of the hypothesis, or as a single data point.
Methods must include independent corroboration of those details found in the Bible.
Establishing their plausibility does not help in ascertaining their veracity.

Using the Bible as the only data point without independent corroboration in some way isn't unscientific, it's just bad science.

Feel free to ignore my personal story or the bits about the Old Testament, as they're not about Christianity, proper. You're fearing that I'm trying to throw a bunch of stuff at you at once and then when you fail to answer all questions that I'll attempt to claim victory, which is an unfair assumption. I've never done that to you in these discussions unless you failed to respond to ANYTHING that I wrote, other than to try and throw a fallacy argument at me.

TL;DR: I'm entreating you to give better evidence, and telling you why the "proof" so far isn't acceptable.

Edited by Jeoshua, 28 April 2014 - 07:10 PM.

like x 2
dislike x 1

#809 shadowhawk

Topic Starter
Guest, Member
4,700 posts
12 ₮

Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
NO

Posted 28 April 2014 - 08:24 PM

Ok,
back to the Resurrection which we were talking about. So far I have presented A lecture by William lane Craig on evidence for the resurrections at Yale.
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657069
I then presented a few non Christian Historical sources referring to Jesus and his crucifixion.
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657142
Then I presented a debate regarding whether Jesus was the only God claiming to rise from the dead.
http://www.longecity...-26#entry657554
I then presented two facts concerning the Biblical accounts of the passion that were not known to humans for many hundreds of years after Christ but were still part of the story. How did they know?
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658023
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658217
I then presented “The Passion of The Christ,” a very accurate Hollywood movie of the passion.
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658214
I presented the creed, how the early Church understood these events.
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658228
I then answered why Jesus died more quickly than the other two who were crucified with Him,
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658283
I presented a time line of the entire Passover week leading up to the resurrection
.http://www.longecity...-27#entry658553
I gave a source of what historical evidence is.
http://www.longecity...-27#entry658684

None of this is acceptable evidence for Jeoshua. He has presented zero evidence to rebut anything I presented. However I have not finished concerning the resurrection. I don’t think I am going to convince him. I wonder if he believes anything concerning the history of the time which has far less evidence than Christianity. And this is supposedly intellectual?

I have a question I have asked before. If Christianity is true, would you become a Christian?

#810 BlueCloud

Guest
540 posts
96 ₮

Location:Europa

Posted 28 April 2014 - 08:51 PM

Baltic is not balkan, it's very far apart.

And no, it was always very religious, don't tell me what's what, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

You don't know the heritage of the country that held the border against the turk onslaught for centuries. Centuries!!!

For example, after centuries under turks(ottoman empire), when finally liberated, serbs burned down ALL the mosques in their country immediately and returned to almost 100% orthodox catholic!!!!

You think you're familiar with that "energy" with that "vibe". You know shit.

Christians long suffered under Islam. Devsirme (literally collecting in Turkish) was chiefly the practice by which the Ottoman Empire took slave boys from their Balkan Christian families once every four to five years. They were then converted to Islam with the primary objective of selecting and training the ablest children for the military or civil service of the Empire.

The Janissaries as they were called, became the first Ottoman standing army replacing forces that mostly consisted of tribal warriors (ghazis) whose loyalty and morale were not always guaranteed. Christians often ended up fighting their own children.

Even back before written history, this area has always had trouble, because it is a crossroad for human migration. But this is all off topic. Again, Christians also suffered.

"Christians long suffered under Islam" ... Hilarious.

And by the way, the only time Jews didn't suffer under Christianity ( pre-Renaissance ) was during Muslim Andalussia where their faith was protected. Once the Reconquista took back the territories, the Christian Monarchy offered the Jews two choices : convert to christianism, or leave the country ( wich many did, and found refuge in... islamic north africa ), or death without a trial if they didn't leave or convert...

Back to Spirituality

Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: christianity, religion, spirituality

Community → News & Resources → Interviews → ECU Professor and author - Calvin Mercer Started by onz , 27 Apr 2021 religion, podcast, professor and 1 more...	4 replies 46,374 views	Mind 28 May 2021
Round Table Discussion → Humanities → Spirituality → Humanity is screwed without Transhumanism. Transhumanism is screwed without Religion Started by jroseland , 18 Feb 2021 transhumanism, religion, podcast and 1 more...	4 replies 2,079 views	william7 24 May 2021
Science & Health → Lifestyle → My Story: Game, Biohacking, Travel, Religion, and Psychopaths Started by jroseland , 20 Jan 2021 storytime, game, biohacking and 7 more...	1 reply 1,986 views	xosta 29 Nov 2022
Round Table Discussion → Humanities → Immortalism → Philosophy and immortalism Started by Alvin , 17 May 2017 death, life, cryonics and 7 more...	0 replies 4,033 views	Alvin 17 May 2017
Round Table Discussion → Humanities → Spirituality → Religion Started by Alvin , 13 May 2017 death, cryonics, ethics, soul and 5 more...	1 reply 4,499 views	shadowhawk 13 May 2017

6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users

Google Sign in options