Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by The ClayTaurus, Nov 15, 2005.
Ready, set, controversial!
there is an exact reciprocal argument to his rant.....
Yeah, it starts with, "Imagine if you will, a world where a vocal minority of people don't believe that the federal government exists. After all, they've never seen the government, and just because so many other people believe it exists doesn't make it so. You continually point out how there are roads, utilities, government agencies, etc., but they insist that these things were built as a result of the species wide instinct to protect their own kind, and that the government was just a fairy tale told to children to get them to go along with it. You point out that the system is too complex and deliberate to have occurred randomly, but they reply with, "Well, it must have happened that way, because the federal government doesn't exist and there's no other explanation." I could go on and on about how the downright wacky ways they 'prove' the government doesn't exist, but I digress. Now, imagine if they were so confident that they were right that they forbid the teaching of the 'theory of government' in history classes, since it's not history, it's just some form of fanaticism. Now imagine that they sue people left and right, in local court, of course, for putting up government emblems because it belittles and offends those who don't believe in the government and that there be no special concessions made for these 'fanatics' holidays such as Independance Day, Memorial Day, and Veterans' Day."
You're probably right!
This isn't it.
It's just as rediculous. Ok, maybe a little more so, but I didn't take the time to formulate something better. It does put things in perspective, though.
That link was little more than a 10-minute version of the statement "God is no more plausible than Santa Claus." Talk about overly verbose.
Really? At least we know that a person named St. Nick existed. Of course he isn't the person we've all been told he was in our childhood but at least we know the guy existed at some point in time. I'd say there is at least some uncertainty on whether or not God exists. I'm pretty sure everyone here has questioned it at some point in time.
We also know that a man named Jesus existed, and that a few of His disciples wrote biographies of him, so that we can know some of the events of His life, including the fact that He was crucified, and that He rose from the dead again.
Oh, wait. Those aren't the kind of facts you wanted to see... my bad.
All of these stories were written well after Jesus died. I'm not sure that we can deem them all factual although I'm sure part of the stories were factual. How do we know Jesus didn't go into a coma?
Because he was, uh, STABBED IN THE HEART? Maybe? In fact, the Biblical account details that water and blood both poured from the wound. Now, skeptics for years claimed that this was just some spiritual metaphor thrown in as a fact to add to the mysticism of the story (a metaphor that was completely lost on modern audiences, apparently), but medical science later discovered that under the levels of exhaustion, dehydration, and starvation Jesus would have been under, a pocket of clear fluid resembling and mostly consisting of water would have formed around his heart and that stabbing the heart would release this fluid. The fact that this wasn't known 2000 years ago adds to the credibility of the story, as nobody would have known to add to it as a fabrication.
Separate names with a comma.