Supreme Court Nominee

[Bold2013]

I appreciate this. Thanks

[Chuck Naill]

You realize that what we know of Julius Caesar is based on what you would characterize as "hearsay"

I have no idea what you know.

There is a form of evangelism whereby the Christian asks if the person they are witnessing to believes Plato or Caesar or another exists. The person says yes and the Chrisitan points out that there is more fragments about Jesus than those guys.

The man called Jesus of Nazareth very likely existed. That's not the real debate about the existence of God or the divinity of Jesus. No one calls Plato the Son of God.

Yes, but words are attributed to him. There is a validation that is accepted even if unproven.

[TSherbs]

You realize that what we know of Julius Caesar is based on what you would characterize as "hearsay"

I have no idea what you know.

There is a form of evangelism whereby the Christian asks if the person they are witnessing to believes Plato or Caesar or another exists. The person says yes and the Chrisitan points out that there is more fragments about Jesus than those guys.

The man called Jesus of Nazareth very likely existed. That's not the real debate about the existence of God or the divinity of Jesus. No one calls Plato the Son of God.

Yes, but words are attributed to him. There is a validation that is accepted even if unproven.

Which person is the "him" here?

[Chuck Naill]

You realize that what we know of Julius Caesar is based on what you would characterize as "hearsay"

I have no idea what you know.

There is a form of evangelism whereby the Christian asks if the person they are witnessing to believes Plato or Caesar or another exists. The person says yes and the Chrisitan points out that there is more fragments about Jesus than those guys.

The man called Jesus of Nazareth very likely existed. That's not the real debate about the existence of God or the divinity of Jesus. No one calls Plato the Son of God.

Yes, but words are attributed to him. There is a validation that is accepted even if unproven.

Which person is the "him" here?

Plato

[Chip]

It helps to acknowledge the wisdom and the charm of some stories apart from the idea that they are proof of the existence of a god.

Living outdoors and doing research, I learned how gravity, thermodynamics, precipitation, erosion, transport, deposition, biological evolution, and other processes operate. I could see evidence that all around me. My faith consists of knowing that they will continue to operate without the active intervention of a god, or the support of believers.

I love this world. Sorry it isn't enough for you.

[TSherbs]

Which person is the "him" here?

Plato

Someone claims that there are more fragments by Jesus than by Plato? What a weird claim.

First of all, there are NO fragments of anything actually written by either of them in their handwriting.

Secondly, not even any of the extant manuscripts that we do have of the life of Jesus (from the canon) even claim to be writings actually by Jesus. Nor any of the Apocrypha (that I know of). So, I don't know what that claim that you report could mean. We have many old manuscripts of the writings of Plato, but none, of course, that are purported to be having composed by Plato's own hand. I don't know any serious scholar who doubts the existance of the teacher of Aristotle called "Plato" (in English).

The man called Jesus very likely existed. Athiests don't need to argue that a man called Jesus never existed. In fact, very few of them argue this. And even fewer people argue that Plato did not exist.

Plato is not considered to be divine, and no miracles are attributed to him (that I am aware of). Quite the contrary with Jesus, of course. That's where the element of faith comes in. Not about whether Jesus existed.

Now, whether a writer named "Homer" (in English) ever existed who composed (or collected) the tales that make up The Odyssey is a different debate from a different set of manuscript provenance problems (and is likely from centuries earlier than Jesus).

[TSherbs]

It helps to acknowledge the wisdom and the charm of some stories apart from the idea that they are proof of the existence of a god.

Indeed.

[Chip]

You realize that what we know of Julius Caesar is based on what you would characterize as "hearsay"
[/SIZE][/FONT]

The brainless falsity of this statement (what we know) stuck in my mind.

"Caesar was an accomplished author and historian as well as a statesman; much of his life is known from his own accounts of his military campaigns. Other contemporary sources include the letters and speeches of Cicero and the historical writings of Sallust. Later biographies of Caesar by Suetonius and Plutarch are also important sources. Caesar is considered by many historians to be one of the greatest military commanders in history."

Besides his authentic writing (some of which I've read) and many contemporary accounts which corroborate it, there is also a portrait from life.



He had three or four wives and a lover (Cleopatra) and fathered children.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar

For the sake of contrast:

The gospels were written a generation or more after the death of Jesus. Mark is believed to be the first gospel written around A.D. 60. Matthew and Luke follow and are written between A.D. 60-70; John is the final gospel, written between A.D. 90-100. That is, they are not contemporary accounts and were probably filtered through oral tradition, taking on the character of myths and legends. The gospels barely describe his appearance and no contemporary portrait exists.

The historical reliability of the Gospels is the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. While all four canonical gospels contain some sayings and events which may meet one or more of the five criteria for historical reliability used in biblical studies, the assessment and evaluation of these elements is a matter of ongoing debate. Almost all scholars of antiquity agree that a human Jesus existed, but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. Elements whose historical authenticity is disputed include the two accounts of the Nativity of Jesus, the miraculous events including the resurrection, and certain details about the crucifixion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...of_the_Gospels''

[TSherbs]

I read three books by Crossan when they came out about the historical Jesus. Master-works. Had several debates with my step father (preacher) on the reliability of the NT as a record of the life, words, and deeds of the man called Jesus. The discussions were always respectful, and I miss my stepfather very much (he passed away 15 years ago).

[Chip]

Further, beyond some indication that Jesus had read scrolls in Aramaic or Hebrew, and is said to have traced words in the sand, there's the possibility that he was illiterate.

"Jesus comes to the temple in the morning and sits with the people, teaching and preaching the kingdom of God. Some of the scribes and Pharisees bring to him a woman in their midst who committed adultery, and they tested and asked Jesus what they should do with her given that the Law of Moses commands that she must be stoned as a punishment. Jesus did nothing except stooped down to the earth and with his finger began to write on the ground. When they persisted in asking him, he stood up and responded with clemency and said, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her” (John 8:7, NRSV translation). This phrase which proclaims the law of humanity and the law of truth, which touches the oppressed, and is uttered by the one who utters the law. And, again, He stooped down and wrote on the ground. Thus, each one of them was dismissed and only the one without sin remained with her whose sin was known. (St Papias of the second century is the first known instance to have likely referred to this story in his book on the sayings and life of Jesus where he tried to gather as many oral traditions as possible, and he is known to have conversed and been closely associated with the school of John the Theologian and his disciples in Asia Minor).

This story is absent from the oldest manuscripts of the Gospel of John, such as Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75, and the most renowned manuscripts of the third and fourth centuries. However, St. Jerome includes the story in his Latin translation of the Bible, known as the Vulgate. The story is also mentioned in older manuscripts such as the Memphitic version of the Bible included this story (Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Northern Dialect or Bohairic Coptic), along with the Ethiopic and Armenian versions of the bible."

https://www.theology-academy.org/vid...te-in-the-dirt

Still, there is no document written by Jesus, nor any transcript of his preaching or teaching that can be dated within his lifetime.

[kazoolaw]

What? His efforts to avoid presenting actual testable evidence?

This is one of the defining aspects of discussions on this subject: science will constantly ask questions, religion will persistently avoid answering.

You are free to reject the evidence of God, and yet espouse an eternal universe contrary to science.

Using your own definition of "actual testable evidence" please answer the question "Why does the universe exist?"

[TSherbs]

Further, beyond some indication that Jesus had read scrolls in Aramaic or Hebrew, and is said to have traced words in the sand, there's the possibility that he was illiterate.

"Jesus comes to the temple in the morning and sits with the people, teaching and preaching the kingdom of God. Some of the scribes and Pharisees bring to him a woman in their midst who committed adultery, and they tested and asked Jesus what they should do with her given that the Law of Moses commands that she must be stoned as a punishment. Jesus did nothing except stooped down to the earth and with his finger began to write on the ground. When they persisted in asking him, he stood up and responded with clemency and said, “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her” (John 8:7, NRSV translation). This phrase which proclaims the law of humanity and the law of truth, which touches the oppressed, and is uttered by the one who utters the law. And, again, He stooped down and wrote on the ground. Thus, each one of them was dismissed and only the one without sin remained with her whose sin was known. (St Papias of the second century is the first known instance to have likely referred to this story in his book on the sayings and life of Jesus where he tried to gather as many oral traditions as possible, and he is known to have conversed and been closely associated with the school of John the Theologian and his disciples in Asia Minor).

This story is absent from the oldest manuscripts of the Gospel of John, such as Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75, and the most renowned manuscripts of the third and fourth centuries. However, St. Jerome includes the story in his Latin translation of the Bible, known as the Vulgate. The story is also mentioned in older manuscripts such as the Memphitic version of the Bible included this story (Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Northern Dialect or Bohairic Coptic), along with the Ethiopic and Armenian versions of the bible."

https://www.theology-academy.org/vid...te-in-the-dirt

Still, there is no document written by Jesus, nor any transcript of his preaching or teaching that can be dated within his lifetime.

I don't believe that he was writing words here. He was doodling, not writing words.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

What? His efforts to avoid presenting actual testable evidence?

This is one of the defining aspects of discussions on this subject: science will constantly ask questions, religion will persistently avoid answering.

You are free to reject the evidence of God, and yet espouse an eternal universe contrary to science.

Using your own definition of "actual testable evidence" please answer the question "Why does the universe exist?"

That is unexpectedly substandard.

Just to clarify, I haven't rejected evidence of god. I haven't been presented with any, by anyone in general and by you specifically as I asked you to. So you continue to avoid the question, probably because you know as well as I that there is no evidence to show.

Why does the Universe exist? No idea, but I don't need to invent mythical beings to explain it. The science will reveal the answer eventually. It's in the nature of the process. Inevitability.

[TSherbs]

...

Just to clarify, I haven't rejected evidence of god. I haven't been presented with any, by anyone in general and by you specifically as I asked you to. So you continue to avoid the question, probably because you know as well as I that there is no evidence to show....

Material things exist, therefore there is a supernatural realm beyond material existence. QED.

Or, if you prefer: Since I can't understand why things exist, it must be a god's doing. QED.

Or, lacking those: the supernatural exists because some books I believe in and some people I have been taught to trust say so. QED.

[TSherbs]

Just to make things clear from some of the other readers in these religious (or gone religious) threads: I respect faith. I grew up in a faithful family. I was married in a Catholic church. If a person makes a simple declaration, "I believe in God," I rarely challenge and I never criticize. Faith is private and important to those who practice it.

But when it gets used in these threads to explain or justify certain behaviors, principles, or codes that are expected also of non-believers or are used as rhetorical startegies in discussions, then I consider the thinking and assumptions open to challenge and criticism, sometimes even sharply. The extension of faith beyond one's own home into or onto the lives of others means that the assumptions, principles, and rationales of that faith can be challenged and tested for relevance, authenticity, legitimacy, etc. If a person states, as an extreme example, that the earth is only 6000 years old because the Bible tells me so, then that person has offered their faith-based reasoning in a discussion forum as explanation, and, thus, is open for comment in reply. The same with "God values the unborn as much as the born." Or "God smote the Soddomites for their sins" and so only heterosexual sex between married people should be sanctioned in society." One need not show any undue deference toward these statements of *reason* simply because they are faith-based.

[Chuck Naill]

I do agree that faith is private, but only to a point. If you start practicing your religion and it conflicts with the laws of the land, there are going to consequences.

Generally, there is not going to be a problem with loving your neighbor as you love yourself, but maybe what loving means has to be defined. Most people will understand the intent, but there are people who will do crazy things and call it love.

Evangelicals are taught to witness. It is actually a forced practice imposed on people. The problem has been highlighted here. If you are talking to someone and they ask for proof, there is no proof available. However, if you give your personal experiences as a suggestion for others, they might consider as long as it doesn't sound like you're trying to sell them something.

Experiences can be bad and poor, just as has been portrayed here.

[Chuck Naill]

McConnel today said the SCOTUS frequently has decisions contrary to a majority of citizens. He also didn't give Trump much credit at all for the three judges he railroaded through.

https://www.theatlantic.com/national...people/241255/