According to the social sciences, religion brings lots of positives.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kQuXIAdeOU

"Think critically!!! " then goes on to tell us that the Romans wrote the Bible and created Christianity in 325 A.D.

LordReed:


In what world is the certitude that Abraham Lincoln existed even remotely like that of the other figures?

it's just a parody of a stupid argument made by some mythicists, specifically the ones who are really guillable.

Did Abe Lincoln really exist?

sonmvayina:

There is no conspiracy about it, you just find it hard to accept the fact that you are wasting your life over a lie..

Nope, I'm just accepting the fact of his historical existence. You going with pseudohistory.

There is no where in the old testament that God said he was sending his son to come and die for sins... When he has already given a solution in 2nd Chronicles 7 :14...no where...
Wake up..

What fallacious reasoning , by the same logic we can conclude that all messianic claimants never existed because they didn't fulfill the messianic prophecies of the old testament.

sonmvayina:


Because he has done what you are scared to do... Do an actual research on the new testament..

He has stated reference for you to look up....

It is up to you at the end of the day.. Wake up or continue in your delusions..

You the one believing in crackpot conspiracy theories yet you think im delusional?

LordReed:

The OP did.

But then went on to assert that the question contains loads of fallacies, which is false.

In what context?

In the context of a debate between an atheist and theist on the kalam cosmological argument, is it fallacious to ask "who created god?"

LordReed:

If you won't take the time to ask me my position, why should I give you the benefit of the doubt?

You could just clarify your position.

On a different note, would you consider the question "Who created God?" to be just as fallacious?

sonmvayina:


this is a good start

Who is Tony Bushby? and why should i take his conspiracy theories serious?

LordReed:

How can you ask a question based on a standard definition that does not cover every position and then claim its not fallacious? Would you not call it fallacious if I ask you a question from JWs or Mormons theology because you are all Christians?

That would be an unjustified assumption since theres 1000s of christian denominations.

Atheism basically only has two definitions floating around, asking a question based on the standard one is completely justified. Atheists who define themselves differently can ignore the question instead of asserting it is fallacious.

sonmvayina:


There was no Christianity prior to Nicea... There were several cults in the Roman Empire at that time, it was emperor Constantine who wanted a single religion for his empire that called the council..
They argued for almost 2 years with no solution.. They finally amalgamated various faction into one composite religion... Roman Catholicism.. The new testament was developed afterwards..

When did eusebius live and whats the earliest manuscript of the new testament?

LordReed:

So what it boils down to is which dictionary you are looking at. It is left to the atheist to decide what type of atheism they hold to. In the case of the OP, they make it clear they don't say there is no god.

Hence its not fallacious.

It remains fallacious because you cannot say all atheists are saying there is no god and the OP is clear that those that do have a burden of proof.

But nobody is claiming that all atheists are saying there is no god. Theists are just asking a simple question based on the standard definition of atheism.

sonmvayina:


My point is that he never existed, he was written into existence by Eusebius just as JK Rowling wrote Harry Potter into existence... They are just figment of people's imaginations....
In the case of Harry Potter, it is for entertainment, while that of Jesus it is for social engineering...

Literally impossible cuz theres manuscripts of the new testament that predate eusebius.

Hence, not a strawman to ask an atheist if he/she can prove there is no God.

[quote author=LordReed post=82180181][/quote]

Philosophical Dictionaries/Encyclopedias:

- Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy (2004), p. 530: “The belief that God – especially a personal, omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent God – does not exist.”

- Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1998), entry by William Rowe: “As commonly understood, atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. So an atheist is someone who disbelieves in God, whereas a theist is someone who believes in God. … the common use of ‘atheism’ to mean disbelief in God is so thoroughly entrenched, we will follow it. We may use the term ‘non-theist’ to characterize the position of the negative atheist.”

- The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (1998) :atheism (from Greek a-, ‘not’, and theos, ‘god’), the view that there are no gods. A widely used sense denotes merely not believing in God and is consistent with agnosticism. A stricter sense denotes a belief that there is no God; this use has become the standard one.

LordReed:


Did you read the 1st fallacy? Which clearly states that the statement is a strawman?

It's not a strawman, atheism has and is still defined in philosophical and ordinary dictionaries as the belief that there are no deities.

sonmvayina:


What purpose is he serving?... How is he relevant to God or man?

How's that relevant to the question of his existence?

LordReed:


Does the OP say they have no burden of proof in that case? And does it say it is a fallacy?

The op says "Not to mention, this low effort question contains a couple of fallacies".

sonmvayina:


There was never any need for Jesus,.. God already provided a solution to the problem of sin in 2nd Chronicles 7 :14...

The story of Jesus is nothing but a fabrication of men..
To deceive and make control easier..

He existed, there is a reason why the christ myth theory is rejected by virtually everyone trained in history.

LordReed:


Where did the OP say that it was?

"There is no god" is an assertion made by lots of atheists.

geoworldedu:


Only myopic historians will call him so. He's completely a work of fictions from all indications.

sure, no wonder historians that agree don't teach at universities.

geoworldedu:
Otem calls him fictitious Jesus.

Historians call him historical jesus.

lol since when is asking some1 proof for their assertions a fallacy?

In terms of its historical accuracy, the film is absolute garbage. A summary of the real history of Hypatia can be seen in this vid below.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpDL8N0p6FA

Cheers01:


Yet you said that he wasn't being sarcastic.

Keep fooling yourself

I wasn't referring to him idiot

Cheers01:


You really made a fool of yourself. Atheists are laughing at you.

Only an ignorant idiot would laugh.

As I'm familiar with CuteMadridista, I know he is an atheist. I've had tons of interactions with him before on this forum, hence I knew he was being sarcastic in that post.

wtf

Dantedasz:


Every Christian sect has their own twisted version of Christianity. It just depends on the sect you are listening to at a particular moment.

We human, we make honest mistakes in our interpretation. Most sects I'm aware of can make some case for their position.

With Hitlers version however no sane person can read the new testament and come to the conclusion that his historical christianity is actually what christ taught. Only an idiot would think that.

That would be like me reading the humanist manifesto and coming to the conclusion that it instructs me to join isis for jihad.

Dantedasz:
Hitler was a Roman Catholic. His mother was a devout Catholic and Hitler was baptized as a youngster in a Catholic church.

Hitler believed in the supremacy of the Aryan race and believed the superior Aryan race would be corrupted if mixed with inferior races such as Jews or Negroes. This was what spurred his desire to protect the Aryan master race.
Hitler in his own twisted version of Christianity believed Jesus was sired by a Roman soldier called Panthera and he had a belief that the Roman's were a Superior race. He believed the Jews were responsible for the death of the Aryan Jesus hence his hatred for all Jews.

Hitler was born a christian and he died a Christian. No amount of spin and bullsh1t lies from Christian's can change that!

Exactly, he had his own twisted version of christianity.

Dantedasz:

I'm not, you misunderstanding my reply to CuteMadridista post. That's your fault not mine.

Dantedasz:


You wouldn't recognize sarcasm,even if it slapped you in the face.

I wasn't referring to CuteMadridista. He's obviously being sarcastic.

LordReed:


So CuteMadridista is a Christian?

I misunderstood your post, thought you were referring to the atheist I saw here on nairaland advising his fellow unbelievers to lie about their beliefs.