It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Prove Christ exists" orders judge

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 11:56 AM
link   
www.timesonline.co.uk...

This is going to be good. If the vatican cannot prove using catholic documents from thier libraries to lend credibility to what we as Christians believe and know to be true from an experiential stand point then where does that leave us? If they do prove it, will a militant atheist believe anyway. It is like a sick joke you already know the punchline to but cannot stop listening to just because it is that morbid. NO FOAM AT THE MOUTH ATHEIST is going to believe no matter what you say. See what I am saying here? It is really funny.

Atheist to his "non-religion" that really is a religion of hate and doubt.

to :bnghd:




posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   
how do you get that athiesm is full of hate?...doubt yes but hate???
and no im not an athiest i was just wondering where you came up with the hate part.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneGodJesus
www.timesonline.co.uk...

This is going to be good. If the vatican cannot prove using catholic documents from thier libraries to lend credibility to what we as Christians believe and know to be true from an experiential stand point then where does that leave us? If they do prove it, will a militant atheist believe anyway.

Believe what? That he actually existed, yes he might.. but this would not prove that he was a god. That would be a seperate case.

From your link:

Signor Cascioli, author of a book called The Fable of Christ, began legal proceedings against Father Righi three years ago after the priest denounced Signor Cascioli in the parish newsletter for questioning Christ’s historical existence.

Should'nt he of turned the other cheek or something?

Atheist to his "non-religion" that really is a religion of hate and doubt.

er. all atheists are hateful?
Thanks for the loving and tolerent generalisation.

[edit on 3-1-2006 by riley]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 12:48 PM
link   
I guess you guys didn't read the article very closely and just wanted to stalk my threads to try and discredit me...lol. You are funny.

ex. al. "The case against Father Enrico Righi has been brought in the town of Viterbo, north of Rome, by Luigi Cascioli, a retired agronomist who once studied for the priesthood but later became a militant atheist."

Seems I was right on the money and you are shown again to be stalkers. He is in fact a militant atheist by account of the article not me. So you can go find another thread to stalk guys.

Mods a little help here?

edit spelling

[edit on 3/1/06 by OneGodJesus]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   
i just asked a question about something you said...i was not stalking, i was not insulting, i was not disproving...just asking..... i happen to find interest in the religious links .....sorry.....i also like to bebate.....if you dont want to talk with people who have other ideas then your own then maybe you should go to an all christian chatroom........where you can all agree and be happy.......but i truly think you have another agenda.......thats why your here......



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneGodJesus
I guess you guys didn't read the article very closely and just wanted to stalk my threads to try and discredit me...lol. You are funny.

I read the article. I am indeed curious as to whether or not this guy can prove Jesus existed.. this has been debated for some time.


Seems I was right on the money and you are shown again to be stalkers. He is in fact a militant atheist by account of the article not me. So you can go find another thread to stalk guys.

Mods a little help here?


By all means use the gripe option.
You are the one who called atheism hateful.. don't palm off the blame.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   
This should be a riot; to see how the priest attempts to wiggle out of this one. All I can think of is him taking the stand, holding up the shroud of Turin, and shrugging slightly as to say - "This is the best I got. See I am right, so there, hmph". The next chapter in this story can't come soon enough.

As to the original poster's comments about atheology, well, it's a odd you feel the need to cast aside the badge of tolerance that Christianity 'supposedly' bears and speak ill of something which you apparently have not delved into.

[edit on 1/3/2006 by Obscure]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Obscure
This should be a riot; to see how the priest attempts to wiggle out of this one. All I can think of is him taking the stand, holding up the shroud of Turin, and shrugging slightly as to say - "This is the best I got. See I am right, so there, hmph". The next chapter in this story can't come soon enough.

As to the original poster's comments about atheology, well, it's a odd you feel the need to cast aside the badge of tolerance that Christianity 'supposedly' bears and speak ill of something which you apparently have not delved into.

[edit on 1/3/2006 by Obscure]


My brother is a hard core atheist and I had a girl friend who was agnostic. They both still are. I even stretched out on a limb here on this one by bringing out this before any of the haters. I am as interested to see if this guy can prove or the other guy disprove he may not have to in light of science saying the proof of an asence does not mean something exists (or something like that).

Again I did not state the guy was a militant atheist the article did...jeez y'know this is tired banter find something of substance to talk about. Like I dunno that article and not me and my thought. Y'know factual stuff that can be proved thus far or things that have been disproved regarding the article. And it is stalking if you are in every instance and attacking anything not to your liking. I haven't done this but clearly you have. As for calling on assistance from a mod, would you just rather I track you down personally and ask you to stop?



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Atheist to his "non-religion" that really is a religion of hate and doubt


This is the line we took issue with, not that the article said the man involved was an atheist. Your classification of atheism.

And yes, we can agree that it will be interesting to see where this goes.

[edit on 1/3/2006 by Obscure]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 02:37 PM
link   
There is a very interesting looking program on in the UK soon about religion.

In the trailer the presenter suggests that religion is an abhorance. He says that without religion good people would still do good things and evil people would still do evil things but it is only religion that can make good people do evil things.

Something to think about.

PS, sorry if this is off topic.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 02:39 PM
link   
There is a problem.

The title of the article says 'prove Christ exhists' and then
the bulk says 'prove Christ exhisted'. That's two different
things.

Prove Christ exhists means that you have to prove that
he is alive or exhisting NOW - either real physically or
in the etherial plane.

Prove Christ exhisted can be done historically with documentation
and the such. But to prove that he exhists NOW ... it's easier
to prove that ghosts exhist through ghost hunting devices and
the such.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   
That would be the fault of the editor or whoever makes up the .lines for each article.

I think it's safe to assume that the judge means "existed" based upon the story reported.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   


My brother is a hard core atheist and I had a girl friend who was agnostic. They both still are. I even stretched out on a limb here on this one by bringing out this before any of the haters. I am as interested to see if this guy can prove or the other guy disprove he may not have to in light of science saying the proof of an absence does not mean something exists (or something like that).


You are thinking of “absence of proof does not mean proof of absence”…often used by the UFOlogy crowd. While one may be able to prove/disprove the historic existence of Christ, that still does not prove/disprove divine status… Personally, I think there is at least as much historic evidence to support his existence as there is to support some others in contention, such as King Arthur, and Merlin, etc. However, even their existence does not mean Merlin was more than a druid, or Excalibur was a magical sword.



Again I did not state the guy was a militant atheist the article did...jeez y'know this is tired banter find something of substance to talk about. Like I dunno that article and not me and my thought. Y'know factual stuff that can be proved thus far or things that have been disproved regarding the article.


No, but YOU in your post called the atheists out by proclaiming the “ism” one of hate and doubt (not the article, but your own words). Hence, the subsequent discussion. There are militant atheists, just as there are militant Christians. (such as those who bomb abortion clinics in the name of God, etc.) No religion is defined by its militants, and all seem to have their bad apples.

Why do you resent atheists so? I myself am an Agnostic. I couldn’t be happier if Christians are right and end up in Heaven, etc. I certainly don’t wish anything bad upon them. I’d imagine that any deity worth worshipping would judge an afterlife sentence more on how the person lived, than what their specific beliefs were. If not, then I really don’t want any part of such a being, and I’ll happily dive . first into the lake of fire before spending eternity with such an entity…




And it is stalking if you are in every instance and attacking anything not to your liking. I haven't done this but clearly you have. As for calling on assistance from a mod, would you just rather I track you down personally and ask you to stop?


There was no violation of the Terms and Conditions by any member responding. Though the “I track you down personally” comment could be deemed a threat. Would you REALLY do so, over a disagreement on an anonymous discussion board? As long as members attach each other’s arguments and positions vs. personal attacks, it is not our place as moderators to stifle such discussion. Indeed, that is why we are here. Personally, I learn more from those I disagree with, then those who agree, as they force me to take a closer look and defend my position.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 04:36 PM
link   

"Prove Christ exists"


Humanity has looked in every orafice of the human body for what constitutes the observer, the self, "the ghost in the machine".

We've mapped the human brain, and know what portions are producing electrical pulses between the brain cells with what stimuli, and with what actions are being performed.

We've dissected millions of bodies.

We've looked in every cortex, every subcortex, and every lobe of the brain for what constitutes as the observer.

There is no portion of the human body that is quantified as the observer.

So then, how can we continue to judge what is real when the self that is determining what is real is intangible?

I can't prove anything truly exists.

I can't prove I exist.

So, how can I prove Christ ever existed?

Just some contrary beliefs we consider, and some accept, that i thought were worth sharing in this thread.

Nice post.



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
No, but YOU in your post called the atheists out by proclaiming the “ism” one of hate and doubt (not the article, but your own words). Hence, the subsequent discussion. There are militant atheists, just as there are militant Christians. (such as those who bomb abortion clinics in the name of God, etc.) No religion is defined by its militants, and all seem to have their bad apples.


You're right, my apologies to all offended. Now stop stalking my posts and let's get some substance.


Originally posted by Gazrok
Why do you resent atheists so?


I would have to hate my brother cuase he is in with that crowd too, and I don't. I just do not like being called out in the way these folks were "he has a hidden agenda" and "he is evangelizing". I am not doing this. I was stating a simple truth as I know it from personal experience in another thread and all of a sudden I am evangelizing because I tell someone that they must be filled with the Holy Ghost to truely understand the scriptures.


Originally posted by Gazrok
There was no violation of the Terms and Conditions by any member responding. Though the “I track you down personally” comment could be deemed a threat. Would you REALLY do so, over a disagreement on an anonymous discussion board?


Rhetorical question and cannot by law be contrued as the definition of a threat, pending the definition of "is"...


Originally posted by Gazrok
As long as members attack each other’s arguments and positions vs. personal attacks, it is not our place as moderators to stifle such discussion. Indeed, that is why we are here. Personally, I learn more from those I disagree with, then those who agree, as they force me to take a closer look and defend my position.


I would think that saying I am "evangelizing" when I was trying to explain that there is a method to understanding and not just some cut and dry dictionary definition of Christianisty constitutes attacking me personally.

Ultimately I must abide by your judgement in this matter.


[edit on 3/1/06 by OneGodJesus]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by plague
and no im not an athiest i was just wondering where you came up with the hate part.


Did I miss something between your post and mine? Where did I paint you as being an atheist?



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by riley
By all means use the gripe option.
You are the one who called atheism hateful.. don't palm off the blame.


You're right my apologies I did get a little vehement.

Sorry just figured out what stfu meant, had to delete it.

[edit on 3/1/06 by OneGodJesus]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneGodJesus
www.timesonline.co.uk...

This is going to be good. If the vatican cannot prove using catholic documents from thier libraries to lend credibility to what we as Christians believe and know to be true from an experiential stand point then where does that leave us? If they do prove it, will a militant atheist believe anyway. It is like a sick joke you already know the punchline to but cannot stop listening to just because it is that morbid. NO FOAM AT THE MOUTH ATHEIST is going to believe no matter what you say. See what I am saying here? It is really funny.

Atheist to his "non-religion" that really is a religion of hate and doubt.

to :bnghd:


Well to be fair, you must mention both extremes in the reluctance to change ... the Ardent Athiest will most likely not change his or her view any more than the fervent believer ... polar extremes seldom compromise.

LCKob aka Sam

[edit on 3-1-2006 by LCKob]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneGodJesus

Originally posted by plague
and no im not an athiest i was just wondering where you came up with the hate part.


Did I miss something between your post and mine? Where did I paint you as being an atheist?


i just wanted to know why you said they were hateful..and wanted to let you know that it was not a defensive attack because im not athiest..thats it..



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 09:58 PM
link   
I'm athiest, but the only hateful part I have toward's religion is how they murdered innocent people and destroyed culture's and history forcing they're belief onto people. Even to this day they're doing it. Now they're taking school's to court trying to get it taught as ID.

Why can't you just be happy and believe what you believe and let the rest of us believe what we want?

Anywho, even if historicly there was a guy named christ who preached on and on about this god dude, that still doesn't give any proof toward's there being a creator.

[edit on 3-1-2006 by Produkt]




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join