Do Atheist Still Believe in God?

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: Barcs

Regarding the leprosy, if you had it for 20 years and it was getting worse eating away all your extremities, and you were instantly healed in seconds by Jesus, that is a miracle even modern science can't accomplish, I think it would be pretty convincing to the person that got healed.

That's a HUGE if. Now if only we knew whether that actually happened or not. We aren't referring to something like that happening in real life however, we are referring to a STORY written by a person 30 years after it happened who was not an eyewitness and assuming it's true.

But then again you would have to believe that miracles like these were possible during the biblical era...which you don't.

Well yeah, I don't believe they are possible now either. It requires assumption and blind belief in old stories.

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

the bible, which is not a historical document.

That statement is a half truth, half lie; meant to deceive those that just don't know any better, and I need to call it out. When secular sources that are non-biblical line up with what the bible records then it is also an historical document and is quoted in encyclopedia's as such. They even reference the exact bible book and verses when they use it.

The gospels are definitely not historical. Every historian figure that lived during the life of Jesus and near the same area never mentioned anything about him. Pretty much every historian figure that wrote about Jesus was born after he died. Something doesn't add up about that. As far as miraculous claims in the bible, they are not historical. It's not mentioned anywhere outside of the bible.

The first gospel wasn't even written until 30 years after the alleged crucifixion after being passed down word for decades. Yeah, logic says the stories were exaggerated over time or flat out made up in many cases. The gospel of John was 50 years after the crucifixion, and just as suspected the stories are much more exaggerated.

Calling the bible a historical document is big exaggeration. SOME real events are mentioned, but the claims about god and Jesus are found nowhere else and can't really be verified with any evidence. It's hard to even nail down a definitive year for Jesus's birth, since both gospels conflict with the dates based on references to Herod and other people alive at the time.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

youtu.be...

Neil deGrasse Tyson explains it pretty well in this clip. Overall this is a very interesting episode and I recommend watching the whole thing, but it will start automatically at the relevant part. He specifically talks about how the act of measuring is what causes the interference and not actually the act of consciously observing. The experiment has been misinterpreted by many people assuming that looking at something changing it, but it's the act of using the electron microscope to observe. This clip comes right after a discussion on quantum tunneling.

Athiest - no god(s) goddess(es)
Agnostic - believes there is something but doesn't know what

a reply to: Ghostsinthefog

You got it wrong. You are not too far off though. Easy enough to look up.

a reply to: Barcs

Have you seen the video where just by having a person give their attention to forming snowflakes changes the shape of the pattern? I'll see if I can find that again on YouTube. Our minds do have an effect on these experiments and it is shown again and again.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

If you could link some info on that, it would be great. I have to wonder if they use an electron microscope, because then you'd have the same problem and same misinterpretation. I've heard of music or voice affecting snowflakes, but that makes sense because it causes vibrations.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

Then it should be easy to cite some scientific evidence, no?