Religions, Evolution and related Sciences

[Josh P]

I'll go you one better, there is better written evidence for the existence of Jesus than there is for Alexander the great, but Alex beats Jesus numismatically.

But really, the question of historical Jesus is pretty much a clear "yes" except for people really radically opposed to Christianity.

No serious and honest scholar will argue that Jesus never walked the earth. Believing what he said is another story.

 

[RLD]

No serious and honest scholar will argue that Jesus never walked the earth. Believing what he said is another story.

Two completely separate questions.

But you would be surprised by the number of people and publications that argue Jesus never existed.

 

[Josh P]

Two completely separate questions.

But you would be surprised by the number of people and publications that argue Jesus never existed.

They are indeed two separate questions. I could have stated that better.

I’m not surprised. That’s why said serious and honest scholar!

 

[cwpayton]

I think the Four Horsemen went farther than that. Much farther.

Titling your book "The God Delusion" is not an argument in favour of reason in the examination of religion, it was an assault on the idea of god and an insult to people of faith. Of course Dawkins (not Hawkins) was profoundly dishonest in his argument, including his intentional selective quoting of the founding fathers, was called out for it and pretty much abandoned by serious intellectuals after his comments about pedophillia not being so bad. Of the horsemen I would suggest the only one who really brought honest analysis to the subject was Dennett. The other three were profoundly dishonest in their approaches, particularly Dawkins.

BTW, as a amateur enthusiast of evolutionary biology I loved much of Dawkins work on evolution but once he published God Delusion he seemed to completely go off the rails.

Belief in Christianity and Judaism, I would also argue has an archeological and historical basis. Many of the events, people and chronologies in the Bible can be researched historically or archeologically. There is a study of Jesus, for instance, as a historic individual, as opposed to a religious figure. One can examine the evidence as to whether or not he existed. He can be better understood in his historical context which comes from a multiplicity of sources outside of the bible.

Historical evidence can also confirm or work against religious faith. For instance for many years there was no historical or archeological evidence for Pontius Pilot and many people who disbelieved Christianity argued this was proof that this part of the bible was inaccurate. Then a stone tablet from the period was found in 1961 confirming Pilot as prefect of Judea. This, both for people of faith with a rational bent and for people who had denied Pilot's very existence was an important piece of evidence.

Biblical Archeology Review, I believe remains in publication.

So the Abrahamic religions do have an important historical and archeological aspect that impacts how they understand the world and their own faith.

While it is true that the questions of the existence of God and the divinity of Jesus, etc so far remain beyond evidentiary tests, many aspects of the Judeo-Christian worldview are shaped by rational review of text and evidence. And that is without even getting into how the bible can be analysed for authorship, etc.

INDEED the magazine is still published but the last copy I saw ,the old guard were complaining it had gone woke or liberal if you will. So ?

 

[cwpayton]

What absolutely frustrates me is the perception that religion, absolute belief in a creator, somehow can not also be of the mind and the intellect as well as the heart.

Yes I think I miss spoke , I believe the soul and mind are the same ( heart) , it is the spirit that would be defined separately.

 

[Ridge Runner]

Yes I think I miss spoke , I believe the soul and mind are the same ( heart) , it is the spirit that would be defined separately.

I have to defer: as all 3 are separate.

Very narrative explanation,

As being a Christian and having been exposed to many (religious) faiths, by my own choosing.

What I have experienced in the Christian faiths is all believe:

The heart: is emotional and is the emotion of mankind. (good and evil)

The mind: is comprehension and the { pro and con} to the intellect of mankind

The sole: is that which is rendered to the almighty and either accepted or condemned. The soles is that which is of the whole being.

'The road to Hell is paved by good intentions.'

 

[Ray B]

I think it is SOUL, not SOLE, unless you are talking about shoes or the last or only one.