What on earth? Are you saying that Paul was not a direct witness to his own experience? You could claim that he misinterpreted his own experience, or misrepresented it, but not that he wasn’t a witness to his own experience, which was less than 40 years after the crucifixion.
P.S. I mentioned this in my second post, but I am talking about resurrection experiences, including Paul’s vision, not about the resurrection narratives, where various versions were found in some versions of Mark and all versions of the other canonical gospels. I recall one study, though I can’t recall the author’s name, which argued that the resurrection narratives were written to close off other interpretations of the resurrection experiences, and to establish a hierarchy.
Not to an argument, no. But to a post that explained the underlying reasons why I didn’t find arguing useful for a seeker, probably. I might not have done anything visible with it right away but it definitely would have had an impact.
Paul’s own letters weren’t written until 20 years after Jesus death. And you are assuming they are truthful. They are quite self-serving, and quite convenient, as convenient as when Jesus spoke to Joesph Smith, and, as with Smith, Paul claimed the Authority and wisdom of Jesus based on his visions - pretty handy when you are trying to take over early Christianity and turn some of it on its head.
But I’d say it is a safe bet that you don’t accept “visions” of dead people as proof of anything, nor assume the veracity thereof, in your everyday life. If someone of a different religion than yours says they saw a vision of a dead person, maybe even Jesus, that says your religion is wrong, are you going say “Cool, a witness! I believe whatever you say!” I think not.
It’s the other way around. I try to offer people the same kind of respect which I would hope to receive from them. So I don’t believe anybody’s BS, which in turn makes it easier for me to avoid believing my own BS. Everybody wins!
The cutest bit is how you imagine it’s no accident of history and geography that you have this utter horseshit confused with something worth saying.
But maybe I’m jumping to conclusions, and you’ve actually thoroughly investigated all the countless contradicting faiths, and found their veracity wanting while Christianity passed with flying colours, rather than merely slurping up this drivel from your local authority figures, as I’ve so rudely assumed.
Accuse me of arrogance if you like… but as an agnostic (the only demonstrably sane paradigm), I chortle derisively in your direction. And almost everybody else’s. Here we find the roots of despair.
Because achieving a certificate of interestingness from your majesty…
tl;dr: pot, kettle
lots of religions have martyrs, yet I doubt you’d accept their martyrdom as proof of those religions being true.
It’s proof of their individual faith. And lots of comment threads have martyrs too. Is your suffering here not offered as proof of anything? No? Then why complain about the crown of thorns forced on you by TO? Not to put him down? Oh? Free agency is so hard. We all want someone else to pay for what we chose to attend to, even if it just means they hold our strawman for us for just. long. enough.
I try to offer people the same kind of respect which they offer me, with the key difference being that I’d like to open their minds. Sadly, interacting with closed minded asses regularly rather causes one to come across as one. Fortunately, this persona is about as close to my RL one as any of the negativity trollies here.
[quote=“Skeptic, post:54, topic:52319”] @TrollsOpinion’s posts in this thread have been boring
[/quote]Their posts have literally everything to do with how this was titled: They are going to talk about Religion and Jesus.
Not argue about it, not bring logic into it, not discuss it. They are going to talk about it.
Seriously, you guys, nobody said you had to listen or respond.
This is a good example of why I feel fundamentalists do not truly worship the god they say they do.
According to you, the universe was set up by a sociopath. An evil, life- and soul-denying creep.
If you can’t see how wonderful and beautiful the universe truly is, and thus NOT created by such a monster, then the idol you worship reveals only the nastiness in your own soul.
I was bored and tired, and this discussion took less energy than thinking up new adventures for dimension-skipping women or interstellar space-lizard pirates. Wasn’t as fun, though. I’ll get back to work on the real fantasies now.
Religion is outmoded, like buggy whips. Christianity is like the fast food of religion, you can choose McDonalds, Burger King, Fat Burger or even Taco Bell. They barely taste different and are made up of nothing real.
Hardly! I think the real benefit possible with religion is deprogramming, which is needed at least as much as it has ever been.
They are made up of something quite real - YOU.
Saying that all religion is bad simply because of a mass of exploitive garbage would be just as bad as writing off food due to the prevalence of fast food. One might be like McDonalds, but another might be like a perfect Saag Paneer with LSD in it. At least with food, people seem to understand that there are options, moreso than with religions. And even all of the people I have met who claimed to opt for “no religion”, still have lives organized very much around ritual activity, even if they go out of their way to frame it differently.
Fair enough. But, what is “this”, what exactly are you doing? You said you were just facilitating an open discussion. What sort of purpose/agenda does this serve?
you can believe that anyone is trying to dissuade you, if you need to believe that to justify your behavior. Go ahead, that interpretation is canon. Standard issue deflection for closed-eared zealots of any and all stripes.
Does your bridge have a steeple? And what is your goal here? It’s a lot of energy, what it is for?
