-
Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.
Atheists, perhaps it's you, and not God, who truly do not exist.
vonfram88
Active member
Not sure. I guess its become kind of pervasive and habit forming after a couple of thousand years.
Can't keep a good man down they say.
So because we don't know everything, therefore God ( or what ever you want to call it ) is real.
I would have thought us not knowing everything only proves we don't know everything. Inferring anything else is just a guessing game.
Is no different than the frog at the bottom of the well claiming is a frog fairyland, with frog God and frog superman outside the well only because he doesn't know what's out there.
Last edited:
vonfram88
Active member
I don't know why we wear clothes and not kill Abel more often.
Maybe this whole conscience and decency thing descends from a set of principles that were written down a while go.
Those who have chosen faith might just have a sense of civility that is grounded in thousands of years of tradition. I can't see why there is so much butt hurt by the johnny come lately atheist/humanist types.
Maybe this whole conscience and decency thing descends from a set of principles that were written down a while go.
Those who have chosen faith might just have a sense of civility that is grounded in thousands of years of tradition. I can't see why there is so much butt hurt by the johnny come lately atheist/humanist types.
Yeah all that kiddy touching, head chopping tradition is so civil.
spartacus
Well-known member
main aspect that matters for society: accountability and transparency to stop religious zealouts and other power hungry people or opportunists doing wrong things. I say no to people in frocks telling us what is the 'right' way in the name of god, albeit they often have some useful things to say.
Long live liberal democratic state and pluralism to help keep religion in its place.
Long live liberal democratic state and pluralism to help keep religion in its place.
El Testicle
Goat that feeling
The fact that there are/were kiddy touchers and often brutal traditions associated with various religious followings only proves that we are all human and subject to all kinds of temptations and weaknesses.
People are flawed.
The church(insert denomination) is not.
People are flawed.
The church(insert denomination) is not.
Of course the church is flawed. Based on fantasy for starters.
Darkoz
-
Which other books spart?
Darkoz
-
I suspect the books of the bible were cherry picked to support their cause
spartacus
Well-known member
The Gospel of Thomas is very different in tone and structure from other New Testament apocrypha and the four Canonical Gospels. Unlike the canonical Gospels, it is not a narrative account of the life of Jesus; instead, it consists of logia (sayings) attributed to Jesus, sometimes stand-alone, sometimes embedded in short dialogues or parables. The text contains a possible allusion to the death of Jesus in logion 65[SUP][9][/SUP] (Parable of the Wicked Tenants, paralleled in the Synoptic Gospels), but doesn't mention his crucifixion, his resurrection, or the final judgment; nor does it mention a messianic understanding of Jesus.[SUP][10][/SUP][SUP][11][/SUP] Since its discovery, many scholars have seen it as evidence in support of the existence of the so-called Q source, which might have been very similar in its form as a collection of sayings of Jesus without any accounts of his deeds or his life and death, a so-called "sayings gospel".[SUP][12]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas
[/SUP]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas
[/SUP]
spartacus
Well-known member
Darkoz
-
The most "authoritative" accounts of a historical Jesus come from the four canonical Gospels of the Bible. Note that these Gospels did not come into the Bible as original and authoritative from the authors themselves, but rather from the influence of early church fathers, especially the most influential of them all: Irenaeus of Lyon who lived in the middle of the second century. Many heretical gospels existed by that time, but Irenaeus considered only some of them for mystical reasons. He claimed only four in number; according to Romer, "like the four zones of the world, the four winds, the four divisions of man's estate, and the four forms of the first living creatures-- the lion of Mark, the calf of Luke, the man of Matthew, the eagle of John (see Against the Heresies). The four gospels then became Church cannon for the orthodox faith. Most of the other claimed gospel writings were burned, destroyed, or lost." [Romer]
Elaine Pagels writes: "Although the gospels of the New Testament-- like those discovered at Nag Hammadi-- are attributed to Jesus' followers, no one knows who actually wrote any of them." [Pagels, 1995]
Not only do we not know who wrote them, consider that none of the Gospels existed during the alleged life of Jesus, nor do the unknown authors make the claim to have met an earthly Jesus. Add to this that none of the original gospel manuscripts exist; we only have copies of copies.
The consensus of many biblical historians put the dating of the earliest Gospel, that of Mark, at sometime after 70 C.E., and the last Gospel, John after 90 C.E. [Pagels, 1995; Helms]. This would make it some 40 years after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus that we have any Gospel writings that mention him! Elaine Pagels writes that "the first Christian gospel was probably written during the last year of the war, or the year it ended. Where it was written and by whom we do not know; the work is anonymous, although tradition attributes it to Mark..." [Pagels, 1995]
Elaine Pagels writes: "Although the gospels of the New Testament-- like those discovered at Nag Hammadi-- are attributed to Jesus' followers, no one knows who actually wrote any of them." [Pagels, 1995]
Not only do we not know who wrote them, consider that none of the Gospels existed during the alleged life of Jesus, nor do the unknown authors make the claim to have met an earthly Jesus. Add to this that none of the original gospel manuscripts exist; we only have copies of copies.
The consensus of many biblical historians put the dating of the earliest Gospel, that of Mark, at sometime after 70 C.E., and the last Gospel, John after 90 C.E. [Pagels, 1995; Helms]. This would make it some 40 years after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus that we have any Gospel writings that mention him! Elaine Pagels writes that "the first Christian gospel was probably written during the last year of the war, or the year it ended. Where it was written and by whom we do not know; the work is anonymous, although tradition attributes it to Mark..." [Pagels, 1995]