UFO's and religion part 2

[DanieltheDragon]

In a related thread these were posited as reasons to disregard belief in Mr.Mitchell's claims of UFO extraterrestrials preventing nuclear war. For background Mr.Mitchell walked on the moon in 1971 and is well connected within the air force.

[Replying to post 12 by Dropship]

Per dropship reasons for dismissing Mitchell's claims

1.

If Mitchell produced just one such photo with the aliens waving to the camera out of the portholes, he might have a point..

A lack of physical evidence

2.

No doubt many of the people he spoke to saw UFO's, but that doesn't mean they were alien craft, they could have just been the usual suspects- weather balloons, weather phenomena or optical illusions etc.

Witnesses basing their claims on mistaken perception

3.

For a start he refuses to name any of the alleged "witnesses".

Anonymous sources

4.

So (no disrespect to him) but I'd say his "mystic dabbling" has convinced him that "voices" have revealed secret things to him

Information via supernatural sources

5.

EDIT- I just found out he's a fundy Christian, he said in another interview-
"..my religious training, which was fundamental Christian.."
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/modules/sm ... temid=1059

Which brings me back to what I said earlier, as fundy christian cultists definitely like to think they're a cut above the rest of us mere mortals..

Fundamentalists are less valuable in terms of veracity.

6.

, but many military personnel have gone on public record as saying they've seen lights in the sky, so Mitchell's "revelation" is simply repeating that and telling us nothing new anyway, so he's not lying in that respect..

Personal revelations are not useful in terms of establishing veracity even when they are echoing other claims of similar revelations.

7.

Well he claims to have had a 'mystical Hindu revelation', so bearing in mind that Hinduism is an evil religion, I'd say its polluted his mind and made him misguided, so I'm inclined to take anyting he says with a large pinch of salt..

His suffers from a bias from religious influences.

Taking just a handful of these reasons
1. A lack of physical evidence
2. Personal revelation(unverifiable)
3. Information vis supernatural means(unverifiable)
4. Anonymous sources
5. Mistaken witnesses


Do any of the gospels clear the bar set here?

How can one have a firm belief in the gospels yet reject Mitchell's claims?

Were either Mitchell or the Gospel writer's lying or making things up?

[DanieltheDragon]

..there is plenty of contradictory accounts that claim Jesus never even existed to begin with..

Wait a minute, some atheists in this very forum say they believe that Jesus DID probably exist, so who are we to believe, you or them?..

neither just let the evidence speak for itself. I am not making a positive assertion one way or the other on the existence of Jesus. Merely positing there is not enough evidence to make such an assertion and what evidence we do have is often contradictory in nature.


The evidence you have presented thus far do not meet the criteria you used against Mr. Mitchell. You continue to violate your own standards set for your self with regards to validating a claim in order to support your belief in the gospels.

[Zzyzx]

.

Gospel-writers Matthew and John were actual disciples

This cannot be shown to be true. No manuscript from the 1sct century bears this name. The manuscripts were first referred this way in the late 2nd century CE around ~170CE.

Neither do any of the Gospels refer to themselves in this manner.

NOBODY, not a single person or priest or Roman ever came forward to say "Hey that never happened, I was there!"

By the time the Gospels were written all of the eye-witnesses would have been dead. Life expectancy was not particularly long back then. However, no a single person, priest, or Roman ever came forward as a witness either. We don't have anyone during the period saying it happened I was there. We only have unnamed anonymous sources claiming these events transpired decades after the fact. However, contemporous to the gospel accounts there is plenty of contradictory accounts that claim Jesus never even existed to begin with but was merely just a spiritual being through revelation and not physically being there.

Wait a minute, some atheists in this very forum say they believe that Jesus DID probably exist, so who are we to believe, you or them?.

Notice, as I trust readers do, that the items in bold above were not addressed. Was that just oversight or might there be good reason to avoid those items?

The argument "some atheists in this very forum say they believe that Jesus DID probably exist," is among the weakest presented. If some people claim that Jesus existed and others claim he did not which are to be accepted as evidence?

Be that as it may, is there evidence that ANY of the gospel writers were actual eyewitnesses to the events and conversations they record (decades or generations after they supposedly occurred)?

Are there ANY actual eyewitness accounts of ANY of the "miracles" told in gospel tales? Did ANY contemporary historian, Chronicler or individual leave existing records describing "miracles" they actually witnessed personally?

[Dropship]

..Notice, as I trust readers do, that the items in bold above were not addressed. Was that just oversight or might there be good reason to avoid those items?..

Between you and me, the forum layout is a tad sprawling and repetitive, because no sooner do i reply to a question in one thread than it pops up later in another thread, and then another and so on!
Also, I notice many posts tend to be far too long, containing a whole truckload of various points like a blunderbuss blast, and I just don't have the time to sort them out because I have moderating duties to attend to at the Mission4today forum (alias PoorOldSpike) and am also active at other websites.
So I prefer a more surgically-precise form of debate and discussion, where points are presented one at a time so that they can be dealt with individually before moving on to a new point.
Big blunderbuss posts may look impressive and rack up "Tokens" (whatever they are) for the poster, but are self-defeating if nobody can be bothered to wade through them. Carefully-aimed individual sniper shots are far more effective!
So if anybody wants to raise a specific point or question with me, go ahead and I guarantee a reply..

"The more the words,the less the meaning,and how does that profit anyone?" (Ecc 6:11)

[Zzyzx]

.

..Notice, as I trust readers do, that the items in bold above were not addressed. Was that just oversight or might there be good reason to avoid those items?..

Between you and me, the forum layout is a tad sprawling and repetitive, because no sooner do i reply to a question in one thread than it pops up later in another thread, and then another and so on!

NO. You mean to say that issues are discussed in more than one thread? How awful.

Also, I notice many posts tend to be far too long, containing a whole truckload of various points like a blunderbuss blast, and I just don't have the time to sort them out

Perhaps it IS difficult to handle two paragraphs Daniel the Dragon posted in #19.

because I have moderating duties to attend to at the Mission4today forum (alias PoorOldSpike) and am also active at other websites.

Many of us have other pursuits and responsibilities. That is a poor excuse for poor performance.

So I prefer a more surgically-precise form of debate and discussion, where points are presented one at a time so that they can be dealt with individually before moving on to a new point.

Those who dislike this Forum are welcome to go elsewhere.

Big blunderbuss posts may look impressive and rack up "Tokens" (whatever they are) for the poster, but are self-defeating if nobody can be bothered to wade through them. Carefully-aimed individual sniper shots are far more effective!

Okay, take a "sniper shot" at – Scholars and theologians are unsure or undecided about the identity of gospel writers or when they wrote, beyond speculation and opinion. Therefore claims that they witnessed what they write about are unsupported conjecture.

[Dropship]

You mean to say that issues are discussed in more than one thread? How awful. ..
Okay, take a "sniper shot" at – Scholars and theologians are unsure or undecided about the identity of gospel writers or when they wrote, beyond speculation and opinion. Therefore claims that they witnessed what they write about are unsupported conjecture.

1- If questions are repeated in more than one thread, some unkind people might feel it was a mischievous attempt by the posters to "smokescreen" and dodge the issue, rather than stay put in one thread where they can be conveniently dealt with..

2- If so-called "scholars and theologians" are unsure, that's their problem, and anyway we don't need them to do our thinking for us!
With a little detective work and cross-referencing of verses, we know enough about the gospel-writers to be able to do a film biopic about them..

Matthew the disciple, formerly Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27) son of Alpheus, was formerly a tax collector (Luke 5:29-30) one of the 12 apostles handpicked by Jesus (Matthew 9:9), he wrote his gospel between c.60 and 80 AD after Mark wrote his first.

Mark, a friend of Jesus's righthand man Peter (1 Peter 5:13) also called John, Mark was a cousin of Barnabas (Colossians 4:10), a helpful co-worker of Paul (2 Timothy 4:11), and wrote his gospel c.60AD not long after some Apostolic Letters were written: i.e., James, Galatians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Romans. His mother was one of the Marys (Acts 12:12) from an influential and probably wealthy family, and so some speculated that the last supper was held in their home and that he was the young man in Mark 14:51-52 which is not in the other accounts.

Luke, a doctor (Col 4:14) and a gentile convert (Luke 1:2) probably by Paul who became his traveling companion (Acts 17:1; 20:5, 6-21:18 ). He wrote his gospel c.65 AD.

John the disciple, (John 13:23) son of Zebedee, the brother of James the "greater" (Matthew 4:21; 10:2; Mark 1:19; 3:17; 10:35) wrote his gospel c.95AD, the last to be written before Revelation. Also from a wealthy family (Mark 1:20; Luke 5:3; John 19:27). His mother was probably Salome (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40). He was one of the closest disciples to Jesus among the twelve (Matthew 17:1; 26:37; Mark 5:37; 13:3). He was zealous (Matthew 20:20-24; Mark 3:17; 10:35-41; Luke 9:49, 54). He became one of the leaders of the Jerusalem Church (Acts 15:6; Galatians 2:9) and of the seven churches in Asia (Revelation 1:11). He was banished to the island of Patmos where he wrote Revelation.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 23 by Dropship]

I would just like to point out that in Post 23 where you are complaining about long posts and being unable to address them, consisted of 183 words and post 19 consisted of 142 words. Typically I keep my posts short and concise to the point to avoid the issue you are talking about. While I certainly understand that not every post can be addressed in its entirety. It did seem that your initial response was rather dismissive and did not actually address anything in post 19. It avoided nearly all the issues brought up and the one point you did focus on your response had nothing to do with it.

If you want to focus specifically on the contradictory nature of contemporaneous Jesus tales and table the rest of the discussion I would be happy to address your "sniper shot" and avoid the "blunder buss".

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 25 by Dropship]

in accordance with your request for sniper shots I am tabling this claim to its own contingent topic to avoid the blunderbuss. This way we can avoid bringing this topic up in other discussions alternatively if you would like to debate this 1v1 without a cattle call of different voices I would understand as well as it can be difficult to address the many debaters that come up in these topics.

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 299#733299

[ghost1234]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]



Ofcourse there are UFO's. Short abbreviation for Unidentified flying objects. As in - Angels as described in the Bible.

Lot of people just picture angels as human looking like old school beings with wings. Ever consider Angels have technology just like humans? I mean the same creator DID create both kind according to the bible correct? I would assume they are more technologically advanced then we are since they have been commanded by God to be "helpers" to humans. Cannot help another if you are inferior, most likely you would be helped rather than be help.

[Inigo Montoya]

You mean to say that issues are discussed in more than one thread? How awful. ..
Okay, take a "sniper shot" at – Scholars and theologians are unsure or undecided about the identity of gospel writers or when they wrote, beyond speculation and opinion. Therefore claims that they witnessed what they write about are unsupported conjecture.

1- If questions are repeated in more than one thread, some unkind people might feel it was a mischievous attempt by the posters to "smokescreen" and dodge the issue, rather than stay put in one thread where they can be conveniently dealt with..

2- If so-called "scholars and theologians" are unsure, that's their problem, and anyway we don't need them to do our thinking for us!
With a little detective work and cross-referencing of verses, we know enough about the gospel-writers to be able to do a film biopic about them..

Matthew the disciple, formerly Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27) son of Alpheus, was formerly a tax collector (Luke 5:29-30) one of the 12 apostles handpicked by Jesus (Matthew 9:9), he wrote his gospel between c.60 and 80 AD after Mark wrote his first.

Mark, a friend of Jesus's righthand man Peter (1 Peter 5:13) also called John, Mark was a cousin of Barnabas (Colossians 4:10), a helpful co-worker of Paul (2 Timothy 4:11), and wrote his gospel c.60AD not long after some Apostolic Letters were written: i.e., James, Galatians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Romans. His mother was one of the Marys (Acts 12:12) from an influential and probably wealthy family, and so some speculated that the last supper was held in their home and that he was the young man in Mark 14:51-52 which is not in the other accounts.

Luke, a doctor (Col 4:14) and a gentile convert (Luke 1:2) probably by Paul who became his traveling companion (Acts 17:1; 20:5, 6-21:18 ). He wrote his gospel c.65 AD.

John the disciple, (John 13:23) son of Zebedee, the brother of James the "greater" (Matthew 4:21; 10:2; Mark 1:19; 3:17; 10:35) wrote his gospel c.95AD, the last to be written before Revelation. Also from a wealthy family (Mark 1:20; Luke 5:3; John 19:27). His mother was probably Salome (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40). He was one of the closest disciples to Jesus among the twelve (Matthew 17:1; 26:37; Mark 5:37; 13:3). He was zealous (Matthew 20:20-24; Mark 3:17; 10:35-41; Luke 9:49, 54). He became one of the leaders of the Jerusalem Church (Acts 15:6; Galatians 2:9) and of the seven churches in Asia (Revelation 1:11). He was banished to the island of Patmos where he wrote Revelation.

Now support your claim these characters wrote the gospel bearing their name and you win.

But you can't. It is faith.