Atheists are Dull-minded

**Yrost** · 09-29-2010, 08:26 PM

You've provided no proof at all. I overturned your claim of "trillions of trillions of causes", science tells us there are only 4 causes and Nitrogen-14 atoms spontaneously form from Carbon-14 atoms. No cause. Your claim is false.

We can't tell if the Papias, Paul, Clement or Polycarp were completely honest people. We don't know if they were fooled or led to believe these things. What we do know is that people do invent Myths and people do believe these myths and that these myths are often based on real events and mixed with folklore. This is apparent in legends and history from all over the world. Historians have great difficulty in determining myth from history, because we can't even tell if the people that supposedly wrote their stories did write them or if it was someone else that wrote it and put it in their name. We can't even tell these things about people in modern history, especially with sightings of Elvis, Bigfoot, UFOs and sayings attributed to Einstein that are completely unproven. In the Chronicles of Japan, which details the founder of the country and past leaders and kings that ruled over the country, it often relates that their kings had supernatural powers and abilities. This is normal in history....

But you don't understand history.

**InTruth** · 09-29-2010, 09:06 PM

Science tells us there are more than 4 causes, since the 4 causes you give don't explain how the universe could always have existed. Therefore, what necessarily follows an infinite regress would mean you would have happened already having had an eternity to do so. Assuming atoms have no cause despite the trillions of causes in nature seems quite disingenuous for that which does not exist can't cause anything. Think how arrogant you are just because you are not smart enough to figure out the cause, so you assume it has no cause. That would be like saying $5 appeared on the ground from nothing because you can't see how it got there. Dumb. I feel the pride of the Devil in you, for he is just as arrogant. I am glad I don't have to spend eternity in the New City with such a pompous mindset as God would never allow such evil hearts in His presence or to harm His elect.

We know the disciples truly believed in what they were doing because they willingly died for their claims. Was Paul fooled by Peter when he spent 15 days with him and Peter told him he saw Jesus alive from the dead with James, John and the other disciples? But how could have Peter lied about this since he died for his testimony. You have no answer.

We know the accounts of the disciples was not a myth since Jesus is the most documented person in antiquity. Legend theory doesn't work because not enough time passed for legend to develop. Within 5 years after the cross, Paul spent 15 days with Peter, and with James. Those first churches were built on the resurrection, so how do you legend that up?

We really do know Paul wrote 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2. For all the epistles we know these 3 chapters were his central message flowing through to all the other epistles. The other epistles wouldn't make much sense in him setting up all the churches if they were not grounded in these 3 chapters.

The person who wrote Revelation, 1,2,3 John and John have some phrases that are common to just John. We know Mark wrote Mark who worked closely with Peter. And Luke certainly wrote Luke, for he said Acts was part two of his former work. He made no mention of Paul's death which is important to mention in a biography. Paul died around 65 AD, so that places Acts around 55 AD. Luke can be placed around 45 AD yet still. And since Luke took from Mark, that places Mark around 35 AD just two years after the cross.

Nobody cares enough about Elvis to go check his grave and with so many Elvis impersonators the odds, again, are stacked against you. Bigfoot could have been a large man with hair all over his body, since this is a rare medical condition. UFO's are explained by natural phenomena like aircraft, weather balloons, even secret government aircraft like hovering disks that I have seen on Youtube. They are always seen at a distance too, never up close and personal so that is hardly convincing. If you watch some amazing magic tricks, when they show you how they are done, it is embarrassing how obvious it is. They are just using lighting. They black out light when they want a person to move from one spot to the next, then bring that lighting back on. Other times they have mirrors or pictures to make it appear as if something is there when behind the scenes they are moving around from one box to the next. Twins are used a lot too. There are just too many things to produce illusions between the UFO and the person observing far off in the distance.

Hope that helps.

**Yrost** · 10-01-2010, 05:08 PM

Science can only demonstrate what we see and know, we can't teach what we don't see. We are always learning. However, saying that there are trillions of causes is not what we see. It is a lie.

I didn't say Elvis was alive. I'm saying that it can seem that way to some people, just like it seems to you that the disciples existed, but it could simply have some other explanation, like lies or impersonations.

How do we know that the new testament is not an amazing work of fiction that people took too seriously?

**InTruth** · 10-01-2010, 05:56 PM

We have seen Jesus so we know. We have seen the testimony of the disciples which show us no naturalistic explanation can account for the origin of their beliefs. We also know the universe always needs a cause by observing trillions of cause and effects in nature, and no hard evidence something comes from nothing, so we know the universe needs a cause that must be outside of itself, outside of time and space. There truly are trillions and trillions of causes. Just today, you could list at least 100 things that happened to you through the process of cause and effect.

Obviously nobody cared enough for their claim they saw Elvis alive from the dead since they didn't go check his grave or die for him, and with so many Elvis impersonators that hardly makes a good argument. You are getting sillier and sillier. If silliness was a good argument for your approach you may have something.

We know there is no possible naturalistic explanation to account for the appearances because all have been exhausted. We know they didn't lie because they went to their deaths with this testimony. People don't willingly let themselves be put to death for what they know to be a lie. And Jesus never had a twin brother, thus the person the disciples spent 3 years with could not have been impersonated when they spent time with him up close and personal after His resurrection, ate with, conversed with, touched and walked with. Even if Jesus had a twin brother, his persona would certainly not be the same. Magicians can use twins because the audience doesn't spend 3 years to get to know those twins' personalities, nor is the show that revealing about the twins. Do you see how atheists don't think things through? Very shallow. Hell is for the shallow. God expects more of you.

We know the Bible is not fiction because it has no fictional qualities like exist for fiction. It is entirely a biographical, autobiographical, letters written to certain individuals, logical proofs, prophetic and a book of spirit to touch your inner man. Since there is no evidence of fictional writing, that's not an option. When you add up all the corroborating evidence of first, second and third generation apostles who knew each other, set up churches together, that would just be too many people literally have to be lying for your grand conspiracy to be true.

That's why almost no scholars go that route. So we can say enemy attestation concedes this fact which gives evidence for the Bible.

**Yrost** · 10-01-2010, 06:02 PM

We can't tell if the entire bible is a work of fiction that people took too seriously, just like many other religious books.

We don't know if everything needs a cause, science has not explained a cause for everything.

There are only 4 fundamental forces that we can trace back to every phenomenon we know of, not trillions.

**InTruth** · 10-01-2010, 06:35 PM

We know the Bible is not a book of fiction, because it exhibits no traits of fiction. The burden is on you. Since it is so multiply attested and corroborated by independent sources, we can be confident. Here is your doublestandard then. You would have to accept everything that ever occurred in antiquity as fictional, but what historians take that approach?

Understand why you as of your last post need to think the Bible is fictional is because you know the proof of God and resurrection is so well proven, the minute you begin to investigate to look into it, it will increasingly leave you uneasy if you still refuse to be saved. I get that. That's part of shutting your mind down like a zombie for Satan to spend eternity in Hell with the Devil.

Who is to say science can explain everything? How does science prove itself? Therefore, all you can do is go with the evidence of trillions and trillions of causes in nature, and no hard evidence something comes from nothing, to know God exists.

You don't need to know everything, for that is a contradiction, since only God could know everything, and obviously, you are not God. False humility is a trait of those who are going to Hell.

We know of 4 fundamental forces, but the forces themselves don't explain themselves, so that blows your theory we can track back to every phenomenon we know of. Your statement is also false because those forces can't explain how the disciples claimed to have seen Jesus alive from the dead in various group settings.

Those 4 forces can explain workings behind the trillions and trillions of causes partially, but not fully, since if there was an finite regress of these causes, you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so.

So you are wrong on all points.

**Yrost** · 10-01-2010, 07:13 PM

The Greeks treated their mythology as a part of their history, but we know what parts are history and what parts are mythology because of the supernatural claims.

Through many cultures historians have a problem being able to determine the difference between history and myth, because of supernatural claims. This is common in studying Japanese history books and Serbian history writings. I do not make the same mistake of favouring Christianity as you do.

Again, there are only 4 fundamental forces, not trillions of causes, so we can't "go with the evidence", because there is none. Also, time breaks down at the quantum level, before you make any arguments about infinite regress you need to explain how quantum time works.

The 4 fundamental forces explain how people wrote fictional books in the past, therefore the disciples actions are explained.

**InTruth** · 10-01-2010, 07:49 PM

Multiple independent sources written at different times all fictional? Multiple independent sources are in favor of authenticity. When Paul wrote to someone about a church he set up previously there is nothing mythological about that. We know it really happened, and we know why he did it, because the disciples did it, as the Holy Spirit led them, gave them strength and conviction, for having seen Jesus alive from the dead.

Your prejudice against Christianity and God of the Bible says it all, because you single out Christianity so you can glean no facts from this historical document, which shows such a strong bias and hostility, that you actually given credence to God's word when you do that. You probably can't even find one scholar who thought Paul didn't set up the churches with other members of the body of Christ.

If there are not trillions of causes in nature then there are not 4 fundamental laws. You can't have it both ways, since laws have origin also. They can't come into being from nothing, nor always have existed. They certainly can't explain how you have free will, how you have a mind and so forth. Nor can they account for the origin of the disciples' beliefs. Lots of problems with your 4 idols.

As time breaks down at the quantum level into a singularity, you still have a singularity that needs a cause Hawking says. And you don't need to know all things. Man may never know how the quantum level works. But what we do know is there are laws, constants, and variables of nature and trillions of causes and effects, that all need a cause, but if there was an eternity of the past, you would have happened already. Since there cannot be infinite regress and something can't come from nothing, there is only one option, that being, the uncaused cause outside of time and space, logically speaking.

**Yrost** · 10-06-2010, 08:39 PM

The thing about history is there the is often a fine line between what did happen and did not. Myths surrounding Muslim caliphs that did exist, meeting with immortals which likely do not exist, does not make Islam more believable. Just as myths surrounding Christian saints that did exist performing miracles that likely did not happen does not making Christianity more believable.

Besides, the two source hypothesis demonstrates that the synoptic gospels were just copies of each other mixed with another document called Q.

I am not prejudiced against Christianity, I'm just curious why I'm supposed to believe your documents and not the Chronicles of Japan or the Muslim Hadith or Serbian Legends and Norse Books of Mythology because all of those are written as historical claims too, they're not aware that they're mythological claims.

The 4 fundamental forces are the cause of all the "causes" you can think of. So how do we know that they can't come from nothing nor be always existing?

The fundamental forces explain everything. Psychology explains consciousness, which explains free will. Psychology is just applied biology. Biology is just applied chemistry. Chemistry is just applied physics. Physics is just mathematics applied to the 4 fundamental forces, which are the root of everything.

We aren't completely sure how time works at the quantum level, to assume that a infinite regress is required is an assumption. Evidence suggests that time is traversal which means that something may have always existed without an infinite regress in the way we understand.

**InTruth** · 10-06-2010, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by Yrost

The thing about history is there the is often a fine line between what did happen and did not. Myths surrounding Muslim caliphs that did exist, meeting with immortals which likely do not exist, does not make Islam more believable. Just as myths surrounding Christian saints that did exist performing miracles that likely did not happen does not making Christianity more believable.

That's why the Minimal Facts Approach is so important, because it helps you not get confused with a million different things. It simply focuses on that which most historians and scholars concede for good reason. I agree with you there is no evidence for some of these things, but we do have evidence for some things such as the disciples multiply attesting to having seen Jesus alive from the dead in various group settings. Therefore, the burden is on you to find a naturalistic explanation. The reason one can have confidence in the miracles of Jesus is because of the proof He raised Himself from the grave, and likewise, the disciples have more credibility in their works as well, including miracles.

Besides, the two source hypothesis demonstrates that the synoptic gospels were just copies of each other mixed with another document called Q.

Finding commonality is not evidence of other sources at all. If I say I saw a 3 horses walking down my street, but another person only saw two horses, and we each record what we found, we would still both be right, since the third horse came a bit later. If we both saw 3 horses and report having seen 3 horses, there is nothing to infer that we are just reporting what someone else said from another source. The differences in information show there is no common source. All I ask is stop overassuming so much. Stop looking with an evil eye by the evil spirit in your spirit, for the real evil is you by always overassuming so much. Can't you see that is pretentious? You are feeding your fantasy life.

I am not prejudiced against Christianity, I'm just curious why I'm supposed to believe your documents and not the Chronicles of Japan or the Muslim Hadith or Serbian Legends and Norse Books of Mythology because all of those are written as historical claims too, they're not aware that they're mythological claims.

What evidence do these others have? Present the evidence, let's consider them. I see evidence in the testimony of the disciples' beliefs, so they truly believed they saw Jesus alive from the dead. No naturalistic theory can account for this, so Jesus is God. Be satisfied with the evidence, for nothing can counter this evidence.

The 4 fundamental forces are the cause of all the "causes" you can think of. So how do we know that they can't come from nothing nor be always existing?

"All the causes" you speak of are trillions and trillions of causes, showing there is always a cause in nature, so the fundamental laws also need a cause since they are in nature. Since that which doesn't exist can't cause anything, it can't cause the fundamental laws of nature. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics would be violated. Doesn't science mean anything to you? If your causes always existed, you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so, so again your proposition fails. Think how silly it is for your timeless non-existing state to have brought into being the universe ad hoc when you admit without time it could not have happened. Why the doublestandard? This is a major hole in your theory. I really think that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard, people who invoke this or that into nature from nothing. I am going to invoke a one billion pound gorilla who is going to put me on mount Everest. This is allowed because according to your theory it can happen from nothing. When are they letting you out?

The fundamental forces explain everything. Psychology explains consciousness, which explains free will. Psychology is just applied biology. Biology is just applied chemistry. Chemistry is just applied physics. Physics is just mathematics applied to the 4 fundamental forces, which are the root of everything.

Psychology doesn't explain consciousness or free will, for psychology doesn't explain where these come from. It only analyzes their working, not their origins. Psychology is all there is to do with the mind and since the mind can't be derived from just nature alone, the cause is God. The same goes for biology, for the cosmos alone can't produce replicating life. Empirically this is proven time and again. One scientist puts the odds at 1 to 10^40,000 chance. Chemistry can't produce the first replicating life. Physics can't produce the simplest replicating life either. So none of these can be the root of everything. God did it! There is no other possibility than that which is outside of nature, who is therefore, immaterial, timeless and spaceless.

We aren't completely sure how time works at the quantum level, to assume that a infinite regress is required is an assumption. Evidence suggests that time is traversal which means that something may have always existed without an infinite regress in the way we understand.

I am just saying if there is an infinite regress, you would have happened already. That's reasonable. If you want to take the position there is no infinite regress, you're still stuck, because if there is no time, then this universe would not exist according to you because you would need time for your laws of nature to work through to bring the universe into being. Moreover, it is ad hoc and arbitrary. Your "traversal" theory fails because that which has no mind can't produce that which does. The universe does not have self-consciousness and God-consciousness, free will, feelings, ability to think, intuition, ability to commune or possess a conscience. Silly nonsense.