₦airaland Forum

Hismasterpiece:
Jesus did exist. He indeed was crucified on a cross.

Historian Flavius Josephus, wrote one of the earliest non-biblical accounts of Jesus.

The first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who according to Ehrman “is far and away our best source of information about first-century Palestine,” twice mentions Jesus in Jewish Antiquities , his massive 20-volume history of the Jewish people that was written around 93 A.D.

Thought to have been born a few years after the crucifixion of Jesus around 37 A.D., Josephus was a well-connected aristocrat and military leader in Palestine who served as a commander in Galilee during the first Jewish Revolt against Rome between 66 and 70 A.D. Although Josephus was not a follower of Jesus, “he was around when the early church was getting started, so he knew people who had seen and heard Jesus,” Mykytiuk says.

In one passage of Jewish Antiquities that recounts an unlawful execution, Josephus identifies the victim, James, as the “brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah.” While few scholars doubt the short account’s authenticity, says Mykytiuk, more debate surrounds Josephus’s lengthier passage about Jesus, known as the “Testimonium Flavianum,” which describes a man “who did surprising deeds” and was condemned to be crucified by Pilate. Mykytiuk agrees with most scholars that Christian scribes modified portions of the passage but did not insert it wholesale into the text.

Another account of Jesus appears in [ Annals of Imperial Rome ], a first-century history of the written around 116 A.D. by the Roman senator and historian Tacitus. In chronicling the [burning of Rome in 64 A.D., Tacitus mentions that [Emperor Nero falsely blamed “the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.”

As a Roman historian, Tacitus did not have any Christian biases in his discussion of the persecution of Christians by Nero, says Ehrman. “Just about everything he says coincides—from a completely different point of view, by a Roman author disdainful of Christians and their superstition—with what the New Testament itself says: Jesus was executed by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, for crimes against the state, and a religious movement of his followers sprang up in his wake.”

“When Tacitus wrote history, if he considered the information not entirely reliable, he normally wrote some indication of that for his readers,” Mykytiuk says in vouching for the historical value of the passage. “There is no such indication of potential error in the passage that mentions Christus.”
https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

Based on the independent mention of Jesus’ trial and execution, I believe Jesus existed. This, in no way, proves the Biblical account of Jesus being the son of God via “immaculate conception” or performing miracles. It merely suggest he existed and was a preacher who was convicted of blasphemy and crucified. A common practice in those days and still today. Although today they just behead you with a machete.

Hismasterpiece:
This is a historical fact.

Since we started this discussion, you’ve never established what you think a fact is, how you determine factuality. History is always a probability. Show me how you calculated this, based on what. On second thought, don’t bother me. Look up your facts, then look up the scholarly consensus on each one. Not some general statement from a bishop, the actual data behind the conclusion.

EDIT: After further digging, I've stumbled accross some online resources that state that Josephus’ account was doctored to support the idea that Jesus was historical when he was not. See here, here and here. There are more sources, but some are not even in English. If you really need more to show that this was a false account and added later by Christians I can show you that too, but all one needs to do is pick up a college textbook to find that the Testimonium Flavianum is a falsified by Christians. Other languages do not have this quotation as it appears to English speakers.

So basically, the best historical record of Jesus was written 60 years after the Bible says he died, is controversial, and doesn’t comment on his divinity.

FreeIgboho:
Why not address the whole talk instead of selective

I addressed all there is to address. Any more would just be redundant.

FreeIgboho:
1) We have no way if knowing FOR SURE the true nature of reality

Bump your head on a door knob or frame OR climb a tree and fall out of it, then let’s talk about the nature of reality. You can bump your head and fall out of tree if you like, just to be sure it was reality. Science does not make such claims about the "true nature of reality". It is always open to amendment, if sufficient evidence is presented.

FreeIgboho:
2) Therefore we can't know for sure whether a supernatural exists but preponderance of evidence and experiences support that it does.

There is no evidence in support that a supernatural agent exists. Subjective experiences do not count as evidence. The brain is capable of imagining things that do not exist. There is no evidence that a Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. Yet there are a large number of believers in a FSM. It makes them feel good. Do you believe that a FSM exists? If not, why did you choose your religion over Pastafarianism? Because your religion makes you feel good? Therefore we can make an educated guess that a supernatural agent does not exist until evidence for the need of its existence is produced.

But you have not answered my inquiry into why anybody should Choose Theism. What evidence do you have to support your case for Theism? Thanks

FreeIgboho:
You are a funny guy, you present a video that supports everything I'm saying, yet u r still arguing.
Below are things the guy said

https://aws1.discourse-cdn.com/business5/uploads/centerforinquiry/original/1X/56c5639914984041bd52b6562f823e69beb2fdcf.jpeg

Yes, it’s your brain that creates reality, not some other Intelligence. And your brain is guessing about the information it receives to begin with.

And it making a “best guess” at that . Watch the Anil Seth clip, before you make selective examples of what he is NOT saying.

Actually this falsifies the concept of a God. God does not create your subjective reality, you do! We certainly do not all agree about the hallucination of an existing God. Therefore we cannot call it reality.

But the fact that you can hallucinate a God shows the subjectivity of that experience. Your reality is a product of your brain, blind, deaf, and locked in a dark bony skull.

When he talks about other consciousnesses, he does not imply the existence of a brainless consciousness. He is identifying all other brained creatures that create their own subjective reality.

FreeIgboho:
No one knows for sure (like in everything), but there is a greater chance theists are right because there is a high probability that this is some sort of a simulation and whoever it is that set it up they refer to as "God".

I would say that given what we know about the Universe, the probability of an Intelligent Designer is close to absolute zero.

Also man has an inbuilt need to worship something.

Irrelevant. And not true. I have no need to worship something.

"They" is whoever set up this our reality. What they want more than anything else is for us never to suspect that things may not be as we perceive them.

Why do you assume it is a “who” and not a “what”?

But there are slip-ups in the system - when a dead person briefly appears (oops!), or a child has clear memory of his past life (oops!), etc

That’s just pure rubbish. Products of subjective mental processes.

Watch this and you will get an idea about how your brain actually works and how you think. Believing that you know how some God thinks and acts is just plain hubris.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyu7v7nWzfo

Hismasterpiece:
That's the thing. My belief in God is not based on nothing. It's based on facts.

Or maybe not. Certainly nothing that proves an afterlife, or a connection between believing and getting there. It’s not that hard anymore to find websites that respond to every claim of a contemporary historical record of the person who is the central character of the gospels. Nothing of them rise about a 50/50 chance of being true.

What is your basis for determining if a historical document is accurate or not? This is a really important question. Everything else hinges on this.

Why Should I Be A Theist?

Theists in the house I invite you all to give me logical and compelling reasons as to why theism is the correct worldview.

OK, FreeIgboho, your turn .

Let's see how you know the things that you do, how confident you are in your assertions, or if they warrant the ad hominem "arrogant".

FreeIgboho:
Whoever set this our reality up must love people who say there is no supernatural. Because it covers up all their slip ups (no system is perfect). Instead of seeing them as signs that things are not as they seem to us, they find a way to justify them. say it is natural thereby covering up their mistakes for them - exactly what they want!

Now, who is they and what are they trying to cover up? Atheists or Theists?

Hismasterpiece:
God is the all-powerful, all-knowing being who created the universe as we know it.

He created man and all other creatures on this planet.

That is meaningless babble.

Or you could have said, "Zeus could be defined as the all-powerful, all-knowing being who created the universe as we know it. He created man and all other creatures on this planet."

Zeus was a god, created by humans. The only way to kill a god is to stop believing in said god. There have been many dying and rising gods, many with miraculous birth stories too. All created by humans. Many were created after a neuro stimulating event which created awe and wonder - such as a volcano, spewing lava on stones.

Why don't you believe in Zeus or Bast or even Hanuman or Durga or even Vishnu or Shiva? Why is your god called God, instead of El or Ehyeh, which, when translated, is also what Vishnu/Krishna was - the I am.

The question is if a sentient creator god is "necessary" for evolutionary processes. The answer to that is NO.

Now, for your sake, let's revisit your question

Hismasterpiece:
What would a logical argument for God sound like to you. Please explain. What do you mean by a logical argument for God.

Definitions are a place to start, otherwise I don't know what you are talking about. If i said Zeus doesn't exist, you probably wouldn’t question that. I'm guessing you don't understand what a logical compelling reason looks like, but, that's what you asked for. I lack a logical compelling reason for believing, so I'm an atheist. That's logically sound.

If I wanted to EXPLAIN why the CONCEPT of god exists, I could look at historical factors, and see how the IDEAS helped keep tribes together centuries ago. I could make a case for those ideas helping people to survive. But those worldviews bring bad, unhealthy ideas with them. We need to sort out what is worth keeping, and belief, based on nothing, is not one that is helping us right now.

Near1:
What does "logic" mean to you? I ask that last question because there is no logical argument for gods.

Hismasterpiece:
What would a logical argument for God sound like to you. Please explain. What do you mean by a logical argument for God.

Read the bolded sentence again, with more attention.

Now I'm starting to think you're just trolling. In case you aren't, before we proceed I'd like you to define "God" first? Can't ask a question if your words aren't defined.

Hismasterpiece:
Why do you say so?

Are you a student? Is this a class project? What does "logic" mean to you? I ask that last question because there is no logical argument for gods. That's one definition of atheism - the lack of belief, the lack of a reason to believe.

Remove God and the bible and nothing changes. The Universe doesn't need a God. Especially a God that cannot be described. The universe and its workings are well described by science. Using applied science we have been able to discover the mathematical nature of the universe. Mathematics have nothing to do with a God. God creates miracles, but no one knows how or why. It is clear that if there ever was a God, and He looked at what He hath created, he would not love this world so much that he gave up his only begotten son.

Religious folks don't seem to realize that according Darwin, the death of your only begotten son ends your family line and "natural selection" has made your line extinct, along with 98 % of all species which are now extinct, because they did not live long enough to procreate. If God ever lived, he is now extinct, because Jesus (God’s offspring) never had offspring himself.

Yet the Universe has done remarkable well without God or his son, except on Earth where untold people have died because religious people thought God told them it was a good idea. The concept of a God simply is not a necessary ingredient of the Universe. It is an obsolete concept, imagined by ignorant people. I dare say it is a corrupting influence. Where does Universal law allow you make amends for your mistakes by asking forgiveness and saying a few prayers? You make a mathematical mistake in your bank book and your balance is off!

Is AGW going to disappear because we are sorry and pray to God to make it go away? Think about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=RD7hNDrV14liA&v=iRsTtzYhTxk

Hismasterpiece:
Atheists in the house I invite you all to give me logical and compelling reasons as to why atheism is the correct worldview.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

God is a superfluous and unnecessary concept…

Near1:
1st - Pere
2nd - Cross
3rd - Maria
4th - Queen
5th - Sammie
6th - JMK

Results might be updated in the light of new information

I can now confirm that Cross is 1st and Pere 2nd. Apologies for the mix-up. Results might still be modified in the light of new information

1st - Cross
2nd - Pere
3rd - Maria
4th - Queen
5th - Sammie
6th - JMK

Now we wait till Sunday.

Drew13:
So Maria is going home?
Or you'll are just catching cruise

She's not.

Giel:
This eviction is easily predictable sha.
Bottom 3 expected are Queen, Sammie and JMk.

The only upset will be if Queen leaves bottom 3 and cross, Maria or pere end up in her place but I'm excited for Sunday.

Given the gap between 3rd and 4th places, that would take a miracle.

ShadowCracker:
My deloite source said Gen.Pere topped the polls.

Can you confirm.

Yes.

1st - Pere
2nd - Cross
3rd - Maria
4th - Queen
5th - Sammie
6th - JMK

Results might be updated in the light of new information

Dotez:
Biggie should send 4 or 5 packing then

The way you so sure ehn

Sunday where hath thou

Are you a Pere fan?

UPDATE!!!

1st - Pere
2nd - Maria
3rd - Cross

Bottom three:
4th - Queen
5th - Sammie
6th - JMK

Threebear:
They're going to post it eventually after the final week .
Relax dear.
Your prediction is wrong.

Lol. Technically, your judgements of my rankings are pointless if you can't prove them right or wrong either way.

babyfaceafrica:
How come Pere is overtaken Maria? I thought she was more popular and been a light-skin babe.. Nigerians will vote her.. What's up?

Her fate isnt sealed yet. The gap between the top 3 is less than 2%.

Threebear:
This is incorrect .

Following the preceding weeks, only the bottom three will be displayed on Sunday. If that's the part you disagree with (the bottom 3 ranking), then we'll just have to wait till then to know who's incorrect.

I won't talk about the top three since (1) they won't show it and (2) the votes between them are so close and therefore will probably be more susceptible to change in position.

I do know that the race for 1st place has always been between Cross and Pere since Tuesday.

babyfaceafrica:
How did you come about this ranking?

I have approximate knowledge of many things. If I knew how I knew all the things I know I'd only be able to know half as many things.

1st - Pere
2nd - Cross
2nd - Maria
4th - Queen
5th - Sammie
6th - JMK

Doesn't look like anything will change among the bottom 3 before tomorrow.

Secularism has become common across the globe, especially in once-religious countries like France and Sweden, even breaking into Nigeria.

I think that the main reason is that we now understand things, which once could only be explained as acts of God.

For most of history many phenomenon could only be explained by God. At one time, thunder and lightning, an earthquake or a plague could only be explained by an angry God. A good harvest was the result of enough prayer. Recovery from serious illness was a miracle. Genetic problems were not understood.

Human brains have developed so that we demand explainations for everything. It has helped us survive and prosper over the millenia.

Now it is a struggle to find anything which requires a belief in God.

We are basically left with (1) where did the Universe come from and (2) what happens after we die.

The answers so far are (1) we don’t have a full understanding on time. We know that time passes at different rates depending on the force of gravity or the speed we travel. That has been proven by experiment. When we fully understand time, we may be on the way to knowing if in some fashion the Universe was always here. Maybe time slowed to a standstill in the distant past. Maybe it is circular. We don’t quite understand it yet. Whatever the reason there is no need for a God to explain it and (2) maybe after we die, we go back to the state before we were born. Again no need for a God.

I would say that people believe in the supernatural because they fear death and losing touch with loved ones who have died. If we did not fear death, there would be no reason to still believe in God.

So, secularism has been increasing as the world becomes more understandable. The gaps in our knowledge are just that - gaps that we will fill. Not reasons to believe in God. So religions have declined.

It might make more sense if you try to imagine someone who doesn’t believe in God and then think of a reason why they would start (apart from wishful thinking for an afterlife).

Richardonald:
...your threat now should be queen, she fit displace Maria for poll,...

Lol. Not even close.

SenatePresdo:
Where una dey see this result. Make una dey calm down naa

We'll find out on Sunday.

observer222:
Currently


Cross

Maria

Queen

Pere

Sammie

Jmk



Pere fans what's happening na?

This result is false. Pere, Maria and Cross have been in the top 3 since the lines opened. Nothing has changed.

VOTING UPDATES

1st - Cross
2nd - Pere
3rd - Maria
4th - Queen
5th - Sammie
6th - JMK