Moved Another step towards answering the question of life's origins - religion

[Lion IRC]

Speak for yourself.
You might have good reason to think that. But please speak for yourself. Or should I say 'yourselves' ? (Lemme check who clicked 'like' on your post.)

I strongly disagree that humans are "very inclined" towards mistakes, delusions, lies, self-harm, ignorance, stupidity.

You strongly disagree? Seriously?

Have you ever read world history?
Christians launched the crusades. The genocide of the Americas. The Holocaust....

Deserves its own thread.

Humans are "very inclined" towards mistakes, delusions, lies, self-harm, ignorance, stupidity.

Speak for yourself. You might have good reason to think that. But please speak for yourself. Or should I say 'yourselves' ? (Lemme check who clicked 'like' on your post.) I strongly disagree that humans are "very inclined" towards mistakes, delusions, lies, self-harm, ignorance, stupidity. You...

iidb.org

 

[bilby]

Deserves its own thread.

Probably not; It's bleeding bloody obvious to everyone who bothers to look around. So, not you, but pretty much everyone else.

 

[TomC]

Deserves its own thread.

Probably not; It's bleeding bloody obvious to everyone who bothers to look around. So, not you, but pretty much everyone else.

I totally want a separate thread.
Get the fook off the field
Tom

 

[pood]

Speak for yourself.
You might have good reason to think that. But please speak for yourself. Or should I say 'yourselves' ? (Lemme check who clicked 'like' on your post.)

I strongly disagree that humans are "very inclined" towards mistakes, delusions, lies, self-harm, ignorance, stupidity.

You strongly disagree? Seriously?

Have you ever read world history?
Christians launched the crusades. The genocide of the Americas. The Holocaust....

Deserves its own thread.

Humans are "very inclined" towards mistakes, delusions, lies, self-harm, ignorance, stupidity.

Speak for yourself. You might have good reason to think that. But please speak for yourself. Or should I say 'yourselves' ? (Lemme check who clicked 'like' on your post.) I strongly disagree that humans are "very inclined" towards mistakes, delusions, lies, self-harm, ignorance, stupidity. You...

iidb.org

I suppose you’re starting a new thread to divert from all the questions you have not answered, like why an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God would allow brain cancer in children?

 

[Lion IRC]

Deserves its own thread.

Probably not; It's bleeding bloody obvious to everyone who bothers to look around. So, not you, but pretty much everyone else.

I totally want a separate thread.
Get the fook off the field
Tom

I created a poll option just for bilby.

 

[Lion IRC]

...why an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God would allow brain cancer in children

I see you're retreating from the claim that God caused it.

Show me the cause. Then we can consider why God allows it.

 

[pood]

...why an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God would allow brain cancer in children

I see you're retreating from the claim that God caused it.

Show me the cause. Then we can consider why God allows it.

I wonder if you are really proud of this sort of disingenuousness?

You’re the one who claims God exists. We know that brain cancer in children exists. If God exists, and if God, as you claim to believe, is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, then it makes no difference whether he caused, or allowed, the brain cancer in children to occur. In either case, the alleged existence of your omni-God is logically inconsistent with the existence of brain cancer in children. Why don’t you stop slipping and sliding around and explain to us how the existence of brain cancer in children IS logically consistent with the omni-God you claim exists?

 

[Lion IRC]

You are evading my question.

I assert that cancer is caused by the actions of humans and that God is working - leading - us to an existence where there will be no cancer.

Now, you can argue that God is taking too long, or that He should proactively intervene to prevent humans from ALL self-harm, and He therefore isn't benevolent enough to meet your definition of benevolent. But you can't make that accusation because you (presumably) don't want God intervening.

Eg. Would you think God benevolent if He intervened to prevent women having abortions? They involve the death of children by human causes.

 

[pood]

You are evading my question.

I assert that cancer is caused by the actions of humans and that God is working - leading - us to an existence where there will be no cancer.

Now, you can argue that God is taking too long, or that He should proactively intervene to prevent humans from ALL self-harm, and He therefore isn't benevolent enough to meet your definition of benevolent. But you can't make that accusation because you (presumably) don't want God intervening.

Eg. Would you think God benevolent if He intervened to prevent women having abortions? They involve the death of children by human causes.

Brain cancer in children is caused by the actions of humans? Are you daft? Cite, please. Show me the peer-reviewed scientific literature demonstrating that brain cancer in children is caused by humans, please.

Are tsunamis also caused by humans? Earthquakes? Tornadoes? Wildfires? All these things that kill many, many, people? They are caused by humans, are they?

As to abortion, fetuses are not “children.”

 

[bilby]

Would you think God benevolent if He intervened to prevent women having abortions?

Given that an omnipotent and onnicognisant God could easily prevent conceptions from occurring in women who don't want to become pregnant, yes.

I would think god non-existent if he didn't prevent women from having abortions by the simple expedient of preventing any and all unwanted conceptions.

And, oh, look...

 

[steve_bank]

You are evading my question.

I assert that cancer is caused by the actions of humans and that God is working - leading - us to an existence where there will be no cancer.

Now, you can argue that God is taking too long, or that He should proactively intervene to prevent humans from ALL self-harm, and He therefore isn't benevolent enough to meet your definition of benevolent. But you can't make that accusation because you (presumably) don't want God intervening.

Eg. Would you think God benevolent if He intervened to prevent women having abortions? They involve the death of children by human causes.

Oh my god!! So to speak.

Humans cause cancer? Prominent Christians have claimed natural disasters are punishment by god for homosexuality.

Do humans cause earthquakes?

 

[Lion IRC]

Brain cancer in children is caused by the actions of humans? Are you daft? Cite, please. Show me the peer-reviewed scientific literature demonstrating that brain cancer in children is caused by humans, please.

After you show me evidence to the contrary.

Are tsunamis also caused by humans?

No, but living near the ocean is an educated risk we take.

Earthquakes?

Skyscrapers?

Tornadoes?

Weve known about tornadoes for millennia.

Wildfires?

Fire is a useful tool and a dangerous natural occurrence. I don't think God can be accused of malice for not making our skin flame proof.

All these things that kill many, many, people? They are caused by humans, are they?

If your complaint is that God hasnt granted us immortality I suggest you read the bible.

As to abortion, fetuses are not “children.”

Oh, you wanna play that game?
OK, "suffering" isn't bad.

 

[Elixir]

Do humans cause earthquakes?

Prob’ly!
Donald Trump creates hurricanes with a Sharpie.

 

[steve_bank]

I don't think it is desperation. It is more like an unsaleable child like belief in an imaginary friend.

 

[steve_bank]

This supports my view that th gospels do not refer to a single individual, Jess refers generally to a number of peple.

Origin of the Name of Jesus Christ | EWTN

EWTN is a global, Catholic Television, Catholic Radio, and Catholic News Network that provides catholic programming and news coverage from around the world.

www.ewtn.com

The word Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek Iesous, which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew Jeshua, or Joshua, or again Jehoshua, meaning "Jehovah is salvation." Though the name in one form or another occurs frequently in the Old Testament, it was not borne by a person of prominence between the time of Josue, the son of Nun and Josue, the high priest in the days of Zorobabel. It was also the name of the author of Ecclesiaticus of one of Christ's ancestors mentioned in the genealogy, found in the Third Gospel (Luke, iii, 29), and one of the St. Paul's companions (Col., iv, 11). During the Hellenizing period, Jason, a purely Greek analogon of Jesus, appears to have been adopted by many ( I Mach., viii, 17; xii, 16; xiv, 22; II Mach., i, 7; ii, 24; iv, 7 26; v, 5 10; Acts, xvii, 5 9; Rom., xvi, 21). The Greek name is connected with verb iasthai, to heal; it is therefore, not surprising that some of the Greek Fathers allied the word Jesus with same root (Euseb., "Dem. Ev.", IV; cf. Acts, ix, 34; x., 38). Though about the time of Christ the name Jesus appears to have been fairly common (Jos., "Ant.", XV, ix, 2; XVII, xiii, 1; XX, ix, 1; "Bel. Jud.", III, ix, 7; IV, iii, 9; VI, v, 5; "Vit.", 22) it was imposed on our Lord by God's express order (Luke, i, 31; Matt., i, 21), to foreshow that the Child was destined to "save his people from their sins." Philo ("De Mutt. Nom.", 21) is therefore, right when he explains Iesous as meaning soteria kyrion; Eusebius (Dem., Ev., IV, ad fin.; P. G., XXII, 333) gives the meaning Theou soterion; while St. Cyril of Jerusalem interprets the word as equivalent to soter (Cat., x, 13; P.G., XXXIII, 677). This last writer, however, appears to agree with Clement of Alexandria in considering the word Iesous as of Greek origin (Paedag., III, xii; P. G., VIII, 677); St. Chrysostom emphasizes again the Hebrew derivation of the word and its meaning soter (Hom., ii, 2), thus agreeing with the exegesis of the angel speaking to St. Joseph (Matt., i, 21).

Jesus (name) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This historical change may have been due to a phonological shift whereby guttural phonemes weakened, including [h].[9] Usually, the traditional theophoric element יהו‎ (Yahu) was shortened at the beginning of a name to יו‎ (Yo-), and at the end to יה‎ (-yah). In the contraction of Yehoshuaʿ to Yeshuaʿ, the vowel is instead fronted (perhaps due to the influence of the y in the triliteral root y-š-ʿ). Yeshua was in common use by Jews during the Second Temple period and many Jewish religious figures bear the name, including Joshua in the Hebrew Bible and Jesus in the New Testament.[2][1]

During the post-biblical period the further shortened form Yeshu was adopted by Hebrew speaking Jews to refer to the Christian Jesus, however Yehoshua continued to be used for the other figures called Jesus.[10] However, both the Western and Eastern Syriac Christian traditions use the Aramaic name ܝܫܘܥ (in Hebrew script: ישוע) Yeshuʿ and Yishoʿ, respectively, including the ʿayin.[11]

The name Jesus is derived from the Hebrew name Yeshua, which is based on the Semitic root y-š-ʕ (Hebrew: ישע), meaning "to deliver; to rescue."[12][13][14] Likely originating in proto-Semitic (yṯ'), it appears in several Semitic personal names outside of Hebrew, as in the Aramaic name Hadad Yith'i, meaning "Hadad is my salvation". Its oldest recorded use is in an Amorite personal name from 2048 B.C.[15]

By the time the New Testament was written, the Septuagint had already transliterated ישוע (Yeshuaʿ) into Koine Greek as closely as possible in the 3rd-century BCE, the result being Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous). Since Greek had no equivalent to the Semitic letter ש‎ shin [ʃ], it was replaced with a σ sigma , and a masculine singular ending [-s] was added in the nominative case, in order to allow the name to be inflected for case (nominative, accusative, etc.) in the grammar of the Greek language. The diphthongal [a] vowel of Masoretic Yehoshuaʿ or Yeshuaʿ would not have been present in Hebrew/Aramaic pronunciation during this period, and some scholars believe some dialects dropped the pharyngeal sound of the final letter ע‎ ʿayin [ʕ], which in any case had no counterpart in ancient Greek. The Greek writings of Philo of Alexandria[16] and Josephus frequently mention this name. In the Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, the name Iēsous comes from Hebrew/Aramaic and means "healer or physician, and saviour," and that the earliest Christians were named Jessaeans based on this name before they were called Christians. This etymology of 'physician' may derive from the sect of the θεραπευταί (Therapeutae), of which Ephanius was familiar.[17]

Christ (title) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Christ,[note 1] used by Christians as both a name and a title, unambiguously refers to Jesus.[5][6][7] It is also used as a title, in the reciprocal usage "Christ Jesus", meaning "the Messiah Jesus" or "Jesus the Anointed", and independently as "the Christ".[8] The Pauline epistles, the earliest texts of the New Testament,[9] often call Jesus "Christ Jesus" or just "Christ".[10]

The concept of the Christ in Christianity originated from the concept of the messiah in Judaism. Christians believe that Jesus is the messiah foretold in the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament. Although the conceptions of the messiah in each religion are similar, for the most part they are distinct from one another due to the split of early Christianity and Judaism in the 1st century.[citation needed]

Although the original followers of Jesus believed Jesus to be the Jewish messiah, e.g. in the Confession of Peter, he was usually called "Jesus of Nazareth" or "Jesus, son of Joseph".[11] Jesus came to be called "Jesus Christ" (meaning "Jesus the Khristós", i.e. "Jesus the Messiah" or "Jesus the Anointed") by Christians, who believe that his crucifixion and resurrection fulfill the messianic prophecies of the Old Testament, especially the prophecy outlined in Isaiah 53.[12]

 

[pood]

Brain cancer in children is caused by the actions of humans? Are you daft? Cite, please. Show me the peer-reviewed scientific literature demonstrating that brain cancer in children is caused by humans, please.

After you show me evidence to the contrary.

Are you actually asserting, without evidence, that humans cause brain cancer in children? If so, you have the burden of proof. Please present your evidence.

Are tsunamis also caused by humans?

No, but living near the ocean is an educated risk we take.

Humans live near water because they need water to survive. Nice Santa in the Sky you got, who made humans need water and then caused, or allowed, tsunamis to kill them.

Earthquakes?

Skyscrapers?

Skyscrapers cause earthquakes? Is this some kind of weird joke? Earthquakes are caused by plate tectonics, which has nothing to do with humans.

Tornadoes?

Weve known about tornadoes for millennia.

And … huh? We’ve known about tornadoes for millennia. Right. So … why does your God cause, or allow, tornadoes to kill people? Or are you saying that humans cause tornadoes? What are you actually babbling about?

Wildfires?

Fire is a useful tool and a dangerous natural occurrence. I don't think God can be accused of malice for not making our skin flame proof.

Huh? So your all-compassionate, all-knowing, all-powerful God just sits on his ass and allows or causes lightning strikes that ignite fires that kill many?

All these things that kill many, many, people? They are caused by humans, are they?

If your complaint is that God hasnt granted us immortality I suggest you read the bible.

I suggest you offer some evidence that the claims in the Bible are true. How would that be?

As to abortion, fetuses are not “children.”

Oh, you wanna play that game?
OK, "suffering" isn't bad.

What does this even mean? Have you any idea what you are even arguing any longer?

 

[Lion IRC]

Are you actually asserting, without evidence, that humans cause brain cancer in children?

Yes. There's plenty of evidence that human activity causes cancer.

Since you seem unfamiliar with the science, here; www.who.int

- Smoking. (Apparently God didn't make us smart enough to know that setting fire to tobacco and deliberately inhaling the smoke isn't natural.)

- Over eating. (Listed in the bible under gluttony)

- Alcohol and substance abuse. (Who would have guessed?)

- Physical inactivity (Listed in the bible under sloth)

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

There's a guy in Mexico who claims to be Jesus.

No, wait, I mean, Jesus Christ. There are lots of people with the name Jesus.

So, is this guy one of the people being used to "corroborate" the existence of a god?

It's a simple yes or no question.

Depending on his reason for thinking God exists - yes.

If he is possessed by a demon that would corroborate theism.

If he has a good reason for thinking God exists and a simultaneous BAD (deluded) reason for thinking he is Jesus of Nazareth that would corroborate theism.

If he sees a burning bush and hears it speaking, and mistakenly thinks the bush is Prometheus, the god of fire, that would corroborate theism.

So a child molesting cult leader who thinks he's the reincarnation of Jesus Christ is evidence that there is a god to you. Wow.

 

[pood]

Sigh. Begging the question is a fallacy of circularity, where one assumes in the premise of an argument what one must prove in the conclusion.

Telling me that Jesus gave his stamp of approval to a couple of churches decades after he died, because he was resurrected, assumes what one must first prove — that Jesus was, in fact, resurrected.

Telling me that Jesus couldnt have given His stamp of approval to a couple of churches decades after He died, because He had died, is circular. It assumes the conclusion that He wasnt Resurrected.

No, the burden of proof is on you to show that he was resurrected. People die all the time and we never see them resurrected. But you claim that one person in the whole history of the world rose after he died. You must show the evidence for this. Please present it now. The bible claiming it happened is not evidence.

 

[Lion IRC]

So a child molesting cult leader who thinks he's the reincarnation of Jesus Christ is evidence that there is a god to you. Wow.

An athest masquerading as clergy might not have any scruples about molesting children.
What would prevent them? Bible verses condemning such behaviour? Bible verses threatening afterlife punishment for such behaviour?

Most atheists I know think the bible isn't persuasive and they don't believe there's an afterlife. (Stop worrying. God isnt real. Enjoy whatever you want.)