And now...

[This_person]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

where do you get that idea?

if they thought he was the son of god why didn't they follow him?

Well, some did

As for the rabbis (the part you highlighted), I think they doubted and thought He was a scam artist who was using Scripture to further His own personal ambitions. However, it can be demonstrated that they thought He was using them well, or He wouldn't have been singled out for punishment.

I'll bet a lot of them changed their thoughts on Him when His tomb went empty, and people saw Him walking, talking, and being around again after dying, though.

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by This_person

Can you admit that much of what we "know" today could also be false, as I admit to you that the very foundations of my religion could, possibly, be false? And, in doing so, can you therefore acknowledge that much of the argument for science, today, is based upon faith, not actual knowledge? And, therefore, acknowledge that being a science-based atheist is just as much a faith based situation as being religious?

not really. most of science is based on observation. while our theories may change, the science itsself is based on observations not faith. Because the tools used to do the observation change it is obvious that new things will be learned as technology allows and that these may contradict previous thories. it doens't mean that they are based in faith in anyway.

BTW, the types of matter you discussed are really only a small step away from elements. the theroy at the time was that everything was compossed of varying ratios of these 4 types of matter and that the one that was most prvalent gave the object most of its properties. we have just expanded on the idea

science doens't have a problem with saying "i dont know" but this is what 'might' have happened.

religion says, just have faith that this is what happened, it doen't matter that logically it doens't make any sense, please just refer to step one......

science says, here is our best theory, and its the one we are going with until a more logical and observable answer is found.

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by This_person

Well, some did

As for the rabbis (the part you highlighted), I think they doubted and thought He was a scam artist who was using Scripture to further His own personal ambitions. However, it can be demonstrated that they thought He was using them well, or He wouldn't have been singled out for punishment.

I'll bet a lot of them (WOULD HAVE) changed their thoughts on Him (IF) His tomb went empty, and (IF) people saw Him walking, talking, and being around again after dying, though.

note the changes above.......

I think this is a more accurate statement. that if they had seen that they would have been more swayed, but the fact remains that most of his contemporaires, just like koresh, didn't believe he was anything other than a man.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

not really. most of science is based on observation. while our theories may change, the science itsself is based on observations not faith. Because the tools used to do the observation change it is obvious that new things will be learned as technology allows and that these may contradict previous thories. it doens't mean that they are based in faith in anyway.

BTW, the types of matter you discussed are really only a small step away from elements. the theroy at the time was that everything was compossed of varying ratios of these 4 types of matter and that the one that was most prvalent gave the object most of its properties. we have just expanded on the idea

science doens't have a problem with saying "i dont know" but this is what 'might' have happened.

religion says, just have faith that this is what happened, it doen't matter that logically it doens't make any sense, please just refer to step one......

science says, here is our best theory, and its the one we are going with until a more logical and observable answer is found.

If you're right about religion, than I misunderstand, because I question continually. So do the constant religious scholars who debate every nuance of every word, the people who go over the Dead Sea scrolls, etc., etc. Most everyone I know who is religious questions, evaluates, and examines on a continual basis, so we all don't understand religion as well as you do.

If you think that's true about science, tell someone the theory of evolution regarding mankind is a theory, and see what kind of reaction you get. Or, about the speed of light changing over the years (or not). Or how old a particular rock is. Or whether every species we are certain is millions of years extinct is really extinct (coelacanth). Or what killed the dinosaurs. I find that arguing theory with people who put all of their faith in science gives the same type of response as arguing religion with Italion Scallion - there is no other possible answer to these people. Maybe there's the rare science-based person who understands the basic concepts that science uses today may be as wrong as the flat earth people, and who can admit they're taking on faith that the "answers" are right. Most science based people I talk to don't recognize mistakes of the past as mistakes. They can't see that it was the pioneer - the outcast, the rebel - who advanced scientific ideas. They see an orderly transition from one knowledge base to another with little or no strife - all well accepted. It's like talking to an Algore about the global warming myth .

[This_person]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

note the changes above.......

I think this is a more accurate statement. that if they had seen that they would have been more swayed, but the fact remains that most of his contemporaires, just like koresh, didn't believe he was anything other than a man.

Well, there were no cameras then to track His rise, so it was all stories, then, too. Unless you personally saw it, it was just a story someone told you.

A lot of people have claimed to be Jesus since then. We have no religions to those people. This particular religion, differently than so many others, has survived the test of time. People still believe it thousands of years later, when the skeptical and cynical of us has shown us the potential flaws of it.

What does that say to you?

I'm not saying that you should believe (I'd never tell someone what to believe or not believe) because others do. I'm just asking why you think this particular religion gained such a foothold, and holds it.

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by This_person

Well, there were no cameras then to track His rise, so it was all stories, then, too. Unless you personally saw it, it was just a story someone told you.

A lot of people have claimed to be Jesus since then. We have no religions to those people. This particular religion, differently than so many others, has survived the test of time. People still believe it thousands of years later, when the skeptical and cynical of us has shown us the potential flaws of it.

What does that say to you?

I'm not saying that you should believe (I'd never tell someone what to believe or not believe) because others do. I'm just asking why you think this particular religion gained such a foothold, and holds it.

what about the religion that says jesus was a prophet and not a man, there is a huge religion based on that........

how about mormon, lots of followers???


jehovah's witnesses???

[This_person]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

what about the religion that says jesus was a prophet and not a man, there is a huge religion based on that........

how about mormon, lots of followers???


jehovah's witnesses???

Mormons? Jehova's Witnesses?

In the big picture, how are they different? Do they not believe Jesus died, rose again, and has an "other than human" origin?

Either way, what do the billions of Christians and the two thousand years mean to you? That was the question. No one disputes there are differences of opinions.

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by This_person

Mormons? Jehova's Witnesses?

In the big picture, how are they different? Do they not believe Jesus died, rose again, and has an "other than human" origin?

Either way, what do the billions of Christians and the two thousand years mean to you? That was the question. No one disputes there are differences of opinions.

and my first point in that post, what about Islam?
what about the established religion that DIDN"T and still do not believe that jesus was anything other than a man?


as far as mormon goes, Smith believed he had indirect contact with god, and there is now a religion based on what he said, that was my point there.

Most non-mormons scoff at the idea. And most of the people at the time sure didn't follow him. yet here we are about a hundred years later with a HUGE religion based on his words......

[This_person]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

and my first point in that post, what about Islam?
what about the established religion that DIDN"T and still do not believe that jesus was anything other than a man?


as far as mormon goes, Smith believed he had indirect contact with god, and there is now a religion based on what he said, that was my point there.

Most non-mormons scoff at the idea. And most of the people at the time sure didn't follow him. yet here we are about a hundred years later with a HUGE religion based on his words......

And, when you scoff at Jesus's story, as reported through Mormonism, all of the facets of Christianity, Jehovah's Witness, etc. - when you know that billions of people throughout two thousand years have all accepted the basic tenants of this story, even with all of the ridicule and scorn, what does that tell you (I keep asking, you keep changing the subject)?

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by This_person

And, when you scoff at Jesus's story, as reported through Mormonism, all of the facets of Christianity, Jehovah's Witness, etc. - when you know that billions of people throughout two thousand years have all accepted the basic tenants of this story, even with all of the ridicule and scorn, what does that tell you (I keep asking, you keep changing the subject)?

it tells me nothing more than the billions who have followed islam, which has a very different take on the person known as jesus.

or the millions that are taoist, or the millions of Bhuddist etc.


and i have answered your questions againa and again. it means nothing.

you have to remember that to the people of his day, jesus was considered a man. A handful of people are responsible for the perception of his diety and the second hand stories of his supernatural exploits. the vast majority or his contemporaries considered him to be more of a koresh than a god. that includes after his supposed rising from the dead.