PDA

View Full Version : How Easter Killed My Faith in Atheism



Barry Morris
03-28-2016, 09:19 AM
Lee Strobel.

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2011/04/16/how-easter-killed-my-faith-in-atheism/

"Earlier this week, humorist Ricky Gervais presented his arguments for atheism and why he thought he was a better Christian than many Christians. In this follow-up essay, writer Lee Strobel offers his defense of Easter."

Hans
03-28-2016, 08:58 PM
So has someone ever asked the question what happened after the Resurrection?

Barry Morris
03-28-2016, 09:48 PM
So has someone ever asked the question what happened after the Resurrection?

Sure. Ask.

Hans
03-28-2016, 10:23 PM
I know what you are going to say, but my question was if anyone actually asked what happened afterwards?

Barry Morris
03-28-2016, 10:26 PM
A guy is killed by the best killers in the world, and then is seen alive afterwards by 500 plus people.

Might change a few things.

Hans
03-28-2016, 10:43 PM
That is what is recorded. Not necessarily what happened, or not necessarily happened at all.

See, I think a much better "sign" would be it became the only religion in the Roman empire under Constantine. That is at least a fact that stands and cannot be disputed.

Barry Morris
03-28-2016, 11:20 PM
Whatever you think Hans.

2000 years later, and here we are still talking about it.

Bluesky
03-29-2016, 09:01 AM
That is what is recorded. Not necessarily what happened, or not necessarily happened at all.

See, I think a much better "sign" would be it became the only religion in the Roman empire under Constantine. That is at least a fact that stands and cannot be disputed.

Of course it can be disputed. It is not a fact. There were many other religions during Constantines rule, although he did try to suppress them.

Hans
03-29-2016, 07:35 PM
But he was the first Roman Emperor to claim conversion to Christianity, and he called the First Council of Nicaea in 325, at which the Nicene Creed was professed by Christians.

Constantine—as possibly the first Christian emperor (although that title could possibly go to Philip the Arab)—is a significant figure in the history of Christianity. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, built on his orders at the purported site of Jesus' tomb in Jerusalem, became the holiest place in Christendom. The Papal claim to temporal power was based on the supposed Donation of Constantine. He is venerated as a saint by Eastern Orthodox Christians, Byzantine Catholics, and Anglicans.


One cannot dispute any of the above, which is my opinion is a better "sign" because it is strictly based on actual facts.
Especially if like you said there were many other religions during Constantines rule.

Barry Morris
03-29-2016, 09:04 PM
Sometimes the bible directly addresses us.

Matthew 16:4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

Bluesky
03-29-2016, 10:31 PM
But he was the first Roman Emperor to claim conversion to Christianity, and he called the First Council of Nicaea in 325, at which the Nicene Creed was professed by Christians.

Constantine—as possibly the first Christian emperor (although that title could possibly go to Philip the Arab)—is a significant figure in the history of Christianity. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, built on his orders at the purported site of Jesus' tomb in Jerusalem, became the holiest place in Christendom. The Papal claim to temporal power was based on the supposed Donation of Constantine. He is venerated as a saint by Eastern Orthodox Christians, Byzantine Catholics, and Anglicans.


One cannot dispute any of the above, which is my opinion is a better "sign" because it is strictly based on actual facts.
Especially if like you said there were many other religions during Constantines rule.

You means it was based on actual historical reports? How do we know that Constantine even existed?

Hans
03-30-2016, 06:22 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great

I highly doubt that was all made up. When it comes to Roman Emperors and their reigns they are typically well documented with many artifacts left behind that bear an emperors name and legacy.

Also fact is that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is a building that still exists today, also with a well know history.

Barry Morris
03-30-2016, 08:11 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great

I highly doubt that was all made up. When it comes to Roman Emperors and their reigns they are typically well documented with many artifacts left behind that bear an emperors name and legacy.

Also fact is that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is a building that still exists today, also with a well know history.

Seems to me that you believe it was all built on lies.

Bluesky
03-30-2016, 08:31 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great

I highly doubt that was all made up. When it comes to Roman Emperors and their reigns they are typically well documented with many artifacts left behind that bear an emperors name and legacy.

Also fact is that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is a building that still exists today, also with a well know history.

And how is that different from the record we have of the eyewitnesses of Jesus himself?

Hans
03-30-2016, 07:00 PM
The difference is they contain attributes that are open for "interpretation".
There is no verified record of someone dying, coming alive and then "ascending".
Now you can say Easter and "eyewitnesses" are that record, but that still does not take away the fact none of that record contains facts.

There are many verified records and existing artifacts of emperor Constantines rule and what happened with Christianity during that reign.

If someone would want to make a point about Christianity, I think Constantine is a good way to make a point.

Hans
03-30-2016, 07:06 PM
Seems to me that you believe it was all built on lies.

No, I am saying it was built by people. If it was not for Constantine Christianity might have gone extinct and replaced by something else.
The Roman Empire at that time was so large and influential in the known world, that they could enforce any Religion of their choosing and have everyone convert/follow that religion, making it the only officially allowed religion in the known world.

That is why I am saying it would make more sense to see that as a "sign" than Easter.
You could say Constantine listened to the Holy Spirit or something like that or had some other divine influence that caused him to pick Christianity over all others.

RWGR
03-31-2016, 11:48 AM
But the Roman Empire began its fall by the time of Constantine. Sure, it took a long time to fall, but the beginning of the end was during Constantine's time. Surely if the Empire's ability to spread its religious views was so great then the views it held at the height of its power (pre-Constantine and the division into east and west) would have spread even moreso.

But the polytheism of the Empire at its apex did not spread as Christianity ultimately did. Roman polytheism was basically stillborn. It did not spread into all of Europe as Christianity did.

Why?

Because Christianity did, and does, give man the dignity he deserves. That resonates in the soul of every person. That's why Christianity spread, not because of an emperor who accepted Christianity as his Empire was in decline.

Bluesky
03-31-2016, 01:46 PM
The difference is they contain attributes that are open for "interpretation".
There is no verified record of someone dying, coming alive and then "ascending".
Now you can say Easter and "eyewitnesses" are that record, but that still does not take away the fact none of that record contains facts.

There are many verified records and existing artifacts of emperor Constantines rule and what happened with Christianity during that reign.

If someone would want to make a point about Christianity, I think Constantine is a good way to make a point.

I am getting dizzy from following your circles. :)

What is a 'verified record'?
Would you say multiple attestation is a verified record?

Would you say a hostile witness is a verified record?

Hans
03-31-2016, 08:27 PM
A verified record as in official documents bearing the emperor's name, seals, coins, statues, busts, and various other historical records.
Then there are historical documents that note the existence of the Emperor in question. There are various documents that do the same for Jesus, leading to the conclusion Jesus did indeed exist.

But that is where the documents typically stop, and "eyewitness accounts" start. Followed by other documents based on those accounts, often leading to additional attributes along the way and next thing you know you have returning from the dead, ascension and all the other extra attributes.

Hans
03-31-2016, 08:33 PM
But the Roman Empire began its fall by the time of Constantine. Sure, it took a long time to fall, but the beginning of the end was during Constantine's time. Surely if the Empire's ability to spread its religious views was so great then the views it held at the height of its power (pre-Constantine and the division into east and west) would have spread even moreso.

But the polytheism of the Empire at its apex did not spread as Christianity ultimately did. Roman polytheism was basically stillborn. It did not spread into all of Europe as Christianity did.

Why?

Because Christianity did, and does, give man the dignity he deserves. That resonates in the soul of every person. That's why Christianity spread, not because of an emperor who accepted Christianity as his Empire was in decline.

What do you think would have happened to Christianity should Constantine have adopted another religion, and continue to prosecute Christians?
I bet it would never have survived the test of time, just like many other religions that became extinct or nearly extinct in the next 1,500 years.

All current major religions have 1 thing in common: they survived because they were adopted by large groups of people, in most cases due to forceful adoption in an empire of some sort.

Bluesky
04-01-2016, 07:32 AM
What do you think would have happened to Christianity should Constantine have adopted another religion, and continue to prosecute Christians?
I bet it would never have survived the test of time, just like many other religions that became extinct or nearly extinct in the next 1,500 years.

All current major religions have 1 thing in common: they survived because they were adopted by large groups of people, in most cases due to forceful adoption in an empire of some sort.

What would have happened? The same thing that happened during the first three centuries during which time the church was persecuted and harassed by the Roman authorities. It grew explosively. In fact, one could say thata the legalization of Christianity under C was the worst thing that happened to the church. Because many people joined the church for reasons other than genuine conversion.

RWGR
04-01-2016, 12:26 PM
What do you think would have happened to Christianity should Constantine have adopted another religion, and continue to prosecute Christians?

It's spread may have been slower, but it still would have spread. Remember, within two hundred years the Roman Empire was not anywhere near the power it is from earlier centuries.


I bet it would never have survived the test of time, just like many other religions that became extinct or nearly extinct in the next 1,500 years.

That's mere conjecture based on flimsy 'evidence'.

And what other religions died int he next 1,500 years?

All current major religions have 1 thing in common: they survived because they were adopted by large groups of people, in most cases due to forceful adoption in an empire of some sort.

Where are records showing Constantine or any other leader that followed forced Christianity on people? In fact, the opposite is true. With the Edict of Milan Constantine made toleration of Christianity and other religions official policy of the Empire.

You're falling into the trap Barry always falls into, Hans. You try to make history fit your pre-conceived views. Your ignorance of a history so basic as the Edict of Milan makes me wonder why on earth you'd even take up this argument.

Hans
04-01-2016, 08:01 PM
The argument is what is a better "sign", Easter or Constantine. Not the Edict of Milan.

Hans
04-01-2016, 08:11 PM
What would have happened? The same thing that happened during the first three centuries during which time the church was persecuted and harassed by the Roman authorities. It grew explosively. In fact, one could say thata the legalization of Christianity under C was the worst thing that happened to the church. Because many people joined the church for reasons other than genuine conversion.

The issue is history disagrees with your statement that the same thing would have happened as during the first 3 centuries:

The "Peace of the Church" is a designation usually applied to the condition of the Church after the publication of the Edict of Milan in 313 by the two Augusti, Western Roman Emperor Constantine I and his eastern colleague Licinius, an edict of toleration by which the Christians were accorded liberty to practise their religion without state interference.

Complete amnesty and freedom were attained two years later when Emperor Constantine, after defeating Maxentius, published early in 313 with his colleague Licinius the famous Edict of Milan by which Christians were guaranteed the fullest liberty in the practice of their religion.

In addition to removing the ban from the Christians, Constantine ordered that the property of which they had been deprived during the persecutions by seizure or confiscation should be returned to them at the expense of the State. For the Christians the immunities and guaranties contained in this act had most important results. Then for the first time it became possible to observe publicly the liturgy in its fullness, and seriously and earnestly to attempt to mould the life of the empire according to Christian ideals and standards. The joy of the Christians at this change in their public status is admirably expressed by Eusebius in his "Church History" (X, ii)


Constantinian shift:

Constantinian shift is a term used by nontrinitarian Christians, as well as Anabaptist and Post-Christendom theologians, to describe the political and theological aspects of the 4th-century process of Constantine's integration of the imperial government with the church.

According to Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic tradition, Constantine I (reigned 306–37) adopted Christianity as his system of belief after the Battle of Milvian Bridge in 312.
Critics point to this shift as the beginning of the phenomenon known as Caesaropapism. In its extreme form, such critics say, Christianity became a religious justification for the exercise of power and a tool in the expansion and maintenance of empire, a Christian empire, also known as Christendom.

Bluesky
04-01-2016, 08:41 PM
Hans, I give up.
You ask, "What would have happened if.."
Then you argue something completely different.

You truly argue all over the place, and cannot stick to the line of argument that you begin.

RWGR
04-02-2016, 10:13 AM
The argument is what is a better "sign", Easter or Constantine. Not the Edict of Milan.

What???

Hans
04-02-2016, 07:34 PM
What???

What is a better sign to give up Atheism: Easter or Constantine.
It is a very simple question.

Hans
04-02-2016, 07:36 PM
Hans, I give up.
You ask, "What would have happened if.."
Then you argue something completely different.

You truly argue all over the place, and cannot stick to the line of argument that you begin.

No, none of what I have posted would have happened without Constantine. You seem to have a different opinion.
It is an opinion, because you have not presented any facts.

Barry Morris
04-28-2016, 10:14 PM
Seems a good spot.

Atheism: the belief that there was once absolutely nothing. And nothing

happened to the nothing until the nothing magically exploded (for no

reason), creating everything and everywhere. Then a bunch of the

exploded everything magically rearranged itself (for no reason

whatsoever), into self replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.


And they mock OUR beliefs???

RWGR
04-29-2016, 08:33 AM
Actually, it was the Easter Bunny that killed my belief in Atheism.

A rabbit, that traverses the world in one night, delivering baskets to everybody...and there's no God???


pffft, whatever