The Religion Discussion

[MG Man]

give me more wine
I don't need bread

[Advent]

I've heard that there is no historical evidence that can be corroborated for the existence of Jesus, any comments / views?

Have you tried reading the bible? The bible is the most verified and historically accurate book in existence. There are many references to Jesus in the Bible. There is no historical corroboration because atheism is starting to take a hold in the field of history and they are beginning to want multiple sources of evidence for the same event. However, in most areas that existed around the time the bible was written, only the king and the record keepers could read and write. This meant that in most cases only one account of events would be recorded. They didn't have facerocks and instachisels back in the day. So I ask you is there any historical corroboration that proves the non-existence of the Bible?

Also, here is a list of other historical events that are not "corroborated" with in multiple historical records
-Hitler's first birthday
-The big bang
-Noah's ark
-Evolution
-The birth and subsequent self-disguise of artificial intelligence

Are you saying that none of these events ever happened?

What did I just, wtf , whatttt, no no nooo, people can't be this ignorant . ID leave it at the great flood of Noah is mathematically impossible to happen, earth isn't the planer from Nolan's latest movie. Also what does biology and astronomy have to do with historical contexts?

Sent from my GT-I9190 using Tapatalk

[Habit7]

no I couldnt get past 10mins.

MG Man, as seen above, made an absolute, universally wrong statement about the historical sources for Jesus' existence, and to redeem himself we get...

two Las Vegas magicians citing a magazine author and a liberal bible scholar. No wonder you were so wrong initially.



So far I see your clip saying that the Bible is wrong because the Jewish ppl were able to survive near extinction for thousands of years but didn't notice the apparent contradiction in Genesis 1 and 2. Surely rabbinic scholars are now scurrying for an explanation for this peccadillo :O

And how did all those species fit in that ark? Maybe the Bible never said so but said that animal "kinds" went in which might more be similar to taxonomy of Family?

If this is the level of scholarship you engage in, searching the deep annals late night HBO programming, no wonder you come to a wrong conclusion.

[Numb3r4]

I don't think that it is safe to say that the Bible is the most historically accurate book.

I would say however it is a figurative retelling of CERTAIN historical events from a particular view point.

The issue of Noah's Ark could be disputed...however it can be said that around the end of the last ice age the melting of the ice could cause significant areas of the Earth's surface to "flood" resulting in a scenario that seemed grand and "world wide" or "global" given our understanding of the world geography AT THAT POINT IN TIME it being so limited.

The scenario of an "EPIC" flood has been noted in many cultures from Sumerian to even Hindu mythology. Curiously in the case of Hindu mythology it is also noted that a comet crashed some time in the Indian Ocean and the resulting impact caused a tsunami that "flooded" low lying areas. Something with which we are familiar with.

The comet could very well be in the limited understanding at the time a manifestation of "God's Wrath" and the ensuing tidal wave the "Righteous Hand of God" washing away all of man's misdeeds and misgivings.

There you have it I've effectively written a verse worthy of ANY religious text and all it was is a highly metaphoric/figurative retelling of events. HOWEVER the FLAW lies in the fact that the vocabulary does not properly give a description of the actual event. That is to say the vocabulary is vague and figurative rather than being descriptive which leads to misinterpretation.

A better way to describe it would be to say something like "....a giant spherical/round object fell/plummeted/descended from the sky and sank into the ocean. After which the tides receded and eventually upon the horizon a wall of water was visible. This wall of water traveled onto shore and moved inward "FLOODING" the land...."

The probable reason why this retelling did not gain traction is probably due to the fact that AT THE TIME many cultures had the habit of using story telling as a means to spread and record news to the masses and this meant making it vapid and entertaining.

Also at the time observational sciences were in their infancy so that it was easier to attribute the event to a "HIGHER BEING" than to spend the time explaining it logically, also given how hard life was then no one probably had the time to explain it or to spend time postulating about anything else or devising theories and testing them.

[Slartibartfast]

I've heard that there is no historical evidence that can be corroborated for the existence of Jesus, any comments / views?

Have you tried reading the bible? The bible is the most verified and historically accurate book in existence. There are many references to Jesus in the Bible. There is no historical corroboration because atheism is starting to take a hold in the field of history and they are beginning to want multiple sources of evidence for the same event. However, in most areas that existed around the time the bible was written, only the king and the record keepers could read and write. This meant that in most cases only one account of events would be recorded. They didn't have facerocks and instachisels back in the day. So I ask you is there any historical corroboration that proves the non-existence of the Bible?

Also, here is a list of other historical events that are not "corroborated" with in multiple historical records
-Hitler's first birthday
-The big bang
-Noah's ark
-Evolution
-The birth and subsequent self-disguise of artificial intelligence

Are you saying that none of these events ever happened?

What did I just, wtf , whatttt, no no nooo, people can't be this ignorant . ID leave it at the great flood of Noah is mathematically impossible to happen, earth isn't the planer from Nolan's latest movie. Also what does biology and astronomy have to do with historical contexts?

Sent from my GT-I9190 using Tapatalk

Sarcasm

I hope you had as much fun reading it as I had writing it.

[rspann]

I don't think that it is safe to say that the Bible is the most historically accurate book.

I would say however it is a figurative retelling of CERTAIN historical events from a particular view point.

The issue of Noah's Ark could be disputed...however it can be said that around the end of the last ice age the melting of the ice could cause significant areas of the Earth's surface to "flood" resulting in a scenario that seemed grand and "world wide" or "global" given our understanding of the world geography AT THAT POINT IN TIME it being so limited.

The scenario of an "EPIC" flood has been noted in many cultures from Sumerian to even Hindu mythology. Curiously in the case of Hindu mythology it is also noted that a comet crashed some time in the Indian Ocean and the resulting impact caused a tsunami that "flooded" low lying areas. Something with which we are familiar with.

The comet could very well be in the limited understanding at the time a manifestation of "God's Wrath" and the ensuing tidal wave the "Righteous Hand of God" washing away all of man's misdeeds and misgivings.

There you have it I've effectively written a verse worthy of ANY religious text and all it was is a highly metaphoric/figurative retelling of events. HOWEVER the FLAW lies in the fact that the vocabulary does not properly give a description of the actual event. That is to say the vocabulary is vague and figurative rather than being descriptive which leads to misinterpretation.

A better way to describe it would be to say something like "....a giant spherical/round object fell/plummeted/descended from the sky and sank into the ocean. After which the tides receded and eventually upon the horizon a wall of water was visible. This wall of water traveled onto shore and moved inward "FLOODING" the land...."

The probable reason why this retelling did not gain traction is probably due to the fact that AT THE TIME many cultures had the habit of using story telling as a means to spread and record news to the masses and this meant making it vapid and entertaining.

Also at the time observational sciences were in their infancy so that it was easier to attribute the event to a "HIGHER BEING" than to spend the time explaining it logically, also given how hard life was then no one probably had the time to explain it or to spend time postulating about anything else or devising theories and testing them.

There you have it,solid proof that the bible is not true.

[nareshseep]

Jesus returned as Sai Baba, and his followers couldnt even tell it was him. If you are reading this it means you were not successful with getting rapture... May Sai Baba / Jesus rest in peace. And as both preached at different times.. God is love... God is energy without a semblance of conscience. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. Haribol!!

[Daran]

The purposeful ignorance of Christians more than other religion is boarder line scary. Actually, allyuh done pass that border long time.

Please read about science and understand it with an open and intelligent mind. It's not in combat with your religion, only you believe it so.

And habit7 you sound quite crazy when you make conspiracy theory claims like "-The birth and subsequent self-disguise of artificial intelligence" so please don't speak of things you know nothing about.

[Numb3r4]

We will never know for sure because we were never there.

[desifemlove]

I've heard that there is no historical evidence that can be corroborated for the existence of Jesus, any comments / views?

Have you tried reading the bible? The bible is the most verified and historically accurate book in existence. There are many references to Jesus in the Bible. There is no historical corroboration because atheism is starting to take a hold in the field of history and they are beginning to want multiple sources of evidence for the same event. However, in most areas that existed around the time the bible was written, only the king and the record keepers could read and write. This meant that in most cases only one account of events would be recorded. They didn't have facerocks and instachisels back in the day. So I ask you is there any historical corroboration that proves the non-existence of the Bible?

Also, here is a list of other historical events that are not "corroborated" with in multiple historical records
-Hitler's first birthday
-The big bang
-Noah's ark
-Evolution
-The birth and subsequent self-disguise of artificial intelligence

Are you saying that none of these events ever happened?

there's no historical record of Jesus' existence. No Roman records, no Jewish ones. no artefacts. we know that in Jesus' lifetime about the Han Dynasty, or Caesar Augustus or whoever from archelogical and written records. which of these exist for Jesus?

[desifemlove]

and dude, what to you is history? we can find out all major events from the ancient world existed from dig sites, records, monuments and cross check. i never seen a Jesus archeological dig, or much records of Jesus outside the Gospels, have you?

[Slartibartfast]

Cmon desifemlove... I know sarcasm is hard to get across in text but I wasn't exactly being subtle. Then again, bluesclues and Habit7 have said crazier things. They are so much more alike than they know. Habit is basically a less experienced bluesclues.

[Habit7]

While you and slartibarfast would like to argue in defense of Evolution, you are not doing a very good job at it.

[nareshseep]

Gawd's the reigning champion of hide and seek since the dawn of time .... unless you're speshul or on shrooms and hears the voices and see the burning marijuana bush

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Habit is basically a less experienced bluesclues.

ouch! that's harsh man.

[bluesclues]

and dude, what to you is history? we can find out all major events from the ancient world existed from dig sites, records, monuments and cross check. i never seen a Jesus archeological dig, or much records of Jesus outside the Gospels, have you?

news.discovery.com/history/religion/jesus-house-1st-century-structure-may-be-where-he-grew-up-150303.htm

www.newhistorian.com/egyptian-book-spells-decoded/2239/

[bluefete]

there's no historical record of Jesus' existence. No Roman records, no Jewish ones. no artefacts. we know that in Jesus' lifetime about the Han Dynasty, or Caesar Augustus or whoever from archelogical and written records. which of these exist for Jesus?

Prior to 1961, there was no historical record / Roman records / Jewish records / artefacts about the existence of Pontius Pilate.

And your point is ... ?


Historical Notes: Pontius Pilate: a name set in stone
Ann Wroe

Saturday 03 April 1999


UNTIL 1961, there was no concrete archaeological evidence that Pontius Pilate, the fifth governor of Judaea, ever existed. There were accounts of him, of course, not least the accounts in the Gospels. But the records of his administration had disappeared completely: no papyri, no rolls, no tablets, no (authentic) letters to Rome. The Roman ruins that remained in Israel seemed to have nothing to do with him. Even his aqueduct - a project that got him into plenty of trouble at the time - appeared to have crumbled away.

In the summer of 1961, however, Italian archaeologists found a piece of limestone, 82cm wide by 68cm high, in the ruins of a sports stadium in Caesarea, beside the sea. The stadium had not been there in Pilate's time; he had yelled at his gladiators in another place. But the stone bore his name, and much else besides.

Because it is the only artefact we have - the only proof of him, and also the only object we can be sure he looked at and thought about - even the tiniest aspects of it have a huge importance. Until there are more discoveries, this is as close as we are going to get.

So we have the name set in stone, Pontius Pilate. It would have been nice to have the praenomen too, Lucius or Publius or Quintus; although it did not mean much to Romans, it somehow makes them more complete to us. But never mind. We also have his title, Praefectus Judaeae. This is important, and not just because it settles the debate about what he called himself.

The word "prefect" had a military tang to it; this man was not just an administrator or a revenue-raiser, but also, when required, a fighter on horseback on the wilder fringes of the empire. Pilate often looks like an effete lawyer in the endless paintings of the trial of Jesus, but he ended his career in Judea just as a prefect should, commanding cavalry, putting down an insurrection in Samaria with sufficient violence to get himself recalled to Rome.

The chief word on the inscription is something of a puzzle: Tiberieum. It appears to mean a complex of buildings in honour of Tiberius, centring round a temple where his image was worshipped, like the Caesareum in Alexandria. If that is what it was, it is the only one recorded, and Pilate may even have made up the name himself. Suetonius says that Tiberius did not like to be worshipped as a god, but he allowed it in the further-flung bits of the empire. So here is Pilate audaciously, even rashly, honouring his emperor, as both Josephus and Philo tell us he did on other occasions. Was he simply being an arch-sycophant, or did he mean it? Or was he moved by a mixture of both feelings? Whichever it was, it gives a new frisson to the reported taunt by the Jews at Christ's trial: "If you let this man go, you are not Caesar's friend."

The engraving of Tiberieum is evenly and soberly done. Not so the name of Pilate himself. There the letters jiggle up and down, with the Ts and the Is of Pontius Pilatus taller than the rest. The effect is untidy, even light-hearted. This looks like a man who is following a fashion of some sort, but is also confident enough to indulge himself. It looks like a man who might, on some occasions, dance.

It is fairly miraculous that the stone should have survived at all. The sea could have worn the lettering away. The builders who subsequently used it, when the Tiberieum itself had fallen into ruin, could have cut it in such a way that the name was illegible. It might have been thrown away as rubble, never recovered. As it is, it seems almost incredible: our one physical link to the man who, Christians believe, gave the human order that brought about mankind's eternal salvation.

Ann Wroe is the author of `Pilate: the biography of an invented man' (Jonathan Cape, pounds 18.99)



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 84786.html

[bluefete]

You Do The Kingdom Math: Creflo Dollar Needs 200,000 People To Donate $300 Each For Ministry Plane
Comments: | Leave A Comment
Mar 13, 2015
By Oretha Winston, Lead Editor


Creflo Dollar

Source: Raymond Boyd/ Getty Images / Getty Images

Popular televangelist and founder of World Changers Church International, Creflo Dollar, is now hoping to get 200,000 people to donate $300 each so he can buy a brand new luxurious $65 million Gulfstream G650 airplane for his ministry, which last year had billionaires reportedly waiting in line to get one.

An appeal on his website to fund the purchase of the multimillion dollar airplane noted that the appeal was triggered by a recent engine failure on his current carrier that could have resulted in a tragedy had it not been for his skillful pilot.

“The ministry’s current airplane, was built in 1984, purchased by the ministry in 1999 and has since logged four million miles. Recently on an overseas trip to a global conference, one of the engines failed. By the grace of God, the expert pilot, who’s flown with Creflo for almost 20 years, landed the plane safely without injury or harm to any passengers,.

“Due to this recent incident coupled with the 31 years the airplane has been in service, we believe it is time to replace this aircraft so that our Pastors and staff can continue to safely and swiftly share the Good News of the Gospel worldwide. Believe it or not, there are still millions of people on this planet who have never heard of Jesus Christ and know nothing of His greatness. Our hearts desire to see precious lives changed and snatched out of darkness and thrust into His marvelous light! We need your help to continue reaching a lost and dying world for the Lord Jesus Christ,” the appeal continued before asking supporters of the ministry to sow a $300 seed into the airplane fund, billed Project G650.

“The mission of Project G650 is to acquire a Gulfstream G650 airplane so that Pastors Creflo and Taffi and World Changers Church International can continue to blanket the globe with the Gospel of grace. We are believing for 200,000 people to give contributions of 300 US dollars or more to turn this dream into a reality — and allow us to retire the aircraft that served us well for many years,”

Watch the video in the link.
http://creflodollarministries.org/Proje ... fault.aspx

To put this in perspective, here are a few items that would cost his congregation much less than $65 million and could probably put a better use to their funds:

The Atlanta-Fulton Public Library System 2014 Budget: $25 million
Tuition, room and board for 150 Morehouse students (2014/15): $6.3 million
Detroit’s Strathmore Apartments Project (129 apartments): $27 million
City of New Orleans Contribution to the Fresh Food Retailer Initiative: $7 million
Upgrades to the most rundown schools in LA Unified School District: $43 million

You do the math.

http://elev8.hellobeautiful.com/1340705 ... try-plane/

[York]

We will never know for sure because we were never there.

Never say never...

[York]

I don't think the first 33 of those 42 sources count.

Also, any link to the secular sources. I'm interested to see what they say.

Well historians only report what they witness people saying but they don't verify the information. Is there any records of anyone collecting eye witness reports from Nazareth / Jerusalem identifying who the latter are and checking of their memory and truthfulness?

[RBphoto]

Still Bummy about them shrinking penises [LOUDLY CRYING FACE][FACE SCREAMING IN FEAR]

[bluefete]

These people real sick!!!!!!


All In The name of God:

A young girl with blood on her head is carried out from one of the mosques after four suicide bombers attacked them during midday prayers

[Kasey]

What you mean 'these people'? You mean "we humans".

[Habit7]

Islam Could Become the World's Largest Religion After 2070
By Emma Green

APR 2 2015, 10:11 AM ET


Who can predict what the world will look like in 55 years? If there's one group willing to go boldly forth into the statistical unknown, it's demographers. Armed with regressions, piles of data, and many a chart, the researchers at Pew have projected that after 2070, the world's Muslims will outnumber the world's Christians.

"In the process of gathering all the data to think about the future of religion in the world, we learn about differences between religious groups that exist today," said Conrad Hackett, the lead demographer on the massive new report. Researchers looked at census data, surveys, and population registers for 234 countries to estimate the future sizes of the world's religious groups. They advise readers to interpret the data with caution—there's a page-long section called "disclaimers"—but offer insight into what demographers know best: how births, deaths, and migration define peoples over time.

The results are fascinating. The Muslim population, for example, is expected to grow twice as fast as the rest of the world's population between now and 2050, largely because Muslims tend to be young and have high fertility rates. A majority of Muslims will still live in Asia and the Pacific region, as they do now (even though Islam is the predominant religion of the Middle East, only one in five Muslims live there). While their life expectancy will likely rise over the next four decades, on average, Muslims will still die younger than members of any other religion, including folk religions. Jews, on the other hand, will live the longest; in 2050, the group's life expectancy will be 85, compared with 75 for Muslims. This is partly because the Jewish population is so concentrated, Hackett said: Roughly 80 percent of Jews live in Israel or the United States, both highly developed countries.

But perhaps the most significant finding is that Muslims may gradually overtake Christians as the world's largest religious group in the coming decades.

Projected Christian and Muslim Shares of the Global Population, 2010-2100


Consider the situation in Europe, where Christianity has historically been dominant. Now, it's the only region where the absolute number of Christians is expected to decline in the coming years. In 2010, 75 percent of Europe's population was Christian; by 2050, that percentage is expected to be closer to 65. In general, the continent's total population is expected to shrink.

Europe's population of Muslims, however, is expected to get much larger, growing by 28 million people over four decades. Muslims will still be a minority in the region, accounting for roughly 10 percent of Europe's population by 2050. But given that Islam's growing presence has already contributed to significant social and political conflict across the continent, this change could be consequential.

In Europe and beyond, age, fertility rates, and migration are the most important factors in projected population changes, but religious conversion also plays a minor role in the results. Despite Christianity's tradition of evangelism, the faith is expected to lose a net total of about 66 million people around the world due to conversions, accounting for both those who convert into the faith and those who convert out. A significant portion of those converts will likely become unaffiliated, a group that's expected to grow by a net total of roughly 61 million purely due to people leaving their religions (as opposed to via higher birth rates, etc.).

As the graph below shows, the majority of those who leave Christianity will be men; they're expected to account for roughly 60 percent of those who choose to leave the religion. Hackett said this is partially explained by the fact that women tend to have higher levels of religious commitment than men. It's also worth noting that this gender difference in patterns of conversion holds for Christianity but not Islam: In certain Muslim countries, Hackett said, there's little religious switching in general, partly because of the serious social and legal consequences people might face for a change of faith.

Projected Changes in the World's Religious Populations Due to Conversion, 2010-2050


The data seems to undermine the theory that the world is on an inevitable, historical march toward secularization. The number of people who don't claim any particular religion is expected to rise modestly in the next few decades, but the world is going to grow much faster than the religiously unaffiliated population will. Most non-religious people live in China, Japan, and the United States, with significant numbers in Europe as well—all places with relatively old populations and low birth rates. Forty years from now, the non-religious portion of the world's population will still only be about 13 percent, which is slightly less than what it was in 2010.

One open question is how religiosity will play out in China. Right now, there isn't a lot of reliable data about religious affiliation in the world's most populous country, Hackett said. Most population information comes from the government, which has been more or less hostile toward organized religion since the late 1960s; even if the country's citizens are religious, they might be unlikely to share their beliefs on a government questionnaire, he said. One scholar, the Purdue University professor Fenggang Yang, says the country is becoming more faithful, though. He estimates that the percentage of Christians in China could grow from 5 percent in 2010 to 67 percent in 2050, based on the growth rate of the religion over time; if this came true, it would significantly shift the world's total Christian population.

For both Christianity and Islam, the region with the most potential will be sub-Saharan Africa, where the population is expected to double in roughly four decades due to extremely high fertility rates. The number of Christians in the region is also expected to double, reaching over 1.1. billion people, and the Muslim population is projected to grow by an astounding 170 percent, hitting nearly 670 million. Largely because of these trends, researchers estimate that two-thirds of the world's population will be Christian or Muslim by 2100.

The world is on track to become a more homogeneously religious place, not a more diverse and secular one. Theories of secularization are based on a vision of a world culturally dominated by the West, and it's true that the United States and Europe may become somewhat less religious in the coming years. But in terms of sheer numbers, the West is shrinking, and the rest of the world is on a very different path: one that's headed toward God.

This article available online at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/global/archi ... 70/389210/

[Slartibartfast]

Interesting read however I think this will have to be taken with a pinch of salt.

A significant portion of those converts will likely become unaffiliated, a group that's expected to grow by a net total of roughly 61 million purely due to people leaving their religions (as opposed to via higher birth rates, etc.).

They didn't cater for non-religious people having kids which I believe will increase with the increasing number of people.

The number of people who don't claim any particular religion is expected to rise modestly in the next few decades, but the world is going to grow much faster than the religiously unaffiliated population will.

Assuming that population growth keeps increasing as it has been doing. This is possible but not guaranteed.

Also, how does one stop being a Christian. I got baptised and confirmed but no longer follow the faith. I know a lot of people are in the same boat and would be counted as one of the religious folk when in fact they are not..

[Habit7]

Interesting read however I think this will have to be taken with a pinch of salt.

A significant portion of those converts will likely become unaffiliated, a group that's expected to grow by a net total of roughly 61 million purely due to people leaving their religions (as opposed to via higher birth rates, etc.).

They didn't cater for non-religious people having kids which I believe will increase with the increasing number of people.

Catering for the potential that non-religious children will continue to be non-religious will be doing the same thing you criticising them for thinking that you are potentially Roman Catholic because you are a child of Catholics. This is based off of statistical trends.

The number of people who don't claim any particular religion is expected to rise modestly in the next few decades, but the world is going to grow much faster than the religiously unaffiliated population will.

Assuming that population growth keeps increasing as it has been doing. This is possible but not guaranteed.

Also, how does one stop being a Christian. I got baptised and confirmed but no longer follow the faith. I know a lot of people are in the same boat and would be counted as one of the religious folk when in fact they are not..

This is based on census data, where one adult askes another adult what is your religious persuasion. It is not rummaging through church documents to get baptismal and confirmation attendance information.

[Slartibartfast]

Catering for the potential that non-religious children will continue to be non-religious will be doing the same thing you criticising them for thinking that you are potentially Roman Catholic because you are a child of Catholics. This is based off of statistical trends.

I know that. What I am asking is what was the purpose for the inconsistency? Either they assume all children assume the religion of their parents or that none do unless they go into detail and apply factors to cater for the likelihood of a child retaining their parents' beliefs.

This is based on census data, where one adult askes another adult what is your religious persuasion. It is not rummaging through church documents to get baptismal and confirmation attendance information.

Cool.

[Slartibartfast]

Ok I found the source of the data for that article you posted. They go way more in depth. Very interesting stuff. I can't verify the data for myself of course but they look like they did their homework on this one so I'll let it pass unless something else disproves it in the future.

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/

[Habit7]

It would be based on the growth trend of the unaffiliated population, and the growth trend of nations with large number of unaffiliateds.

Nevertheless, the unaffiliated tend to have lower birth rates anyway.

Ok I found the source of the data for that article you posted. They go way more in depth.

Yeah I thought the above article was more condensed.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

I was going to post that Pew report but was swamped with other work - thanks Habit7.

And yes the issue here is birthrates of the people who follow a certain religion. Which was a point brought up much earlier that you tend to follow the religion of your parents or those around you.