Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2019 22:08:40 GMT -5
Mat_16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. matthew 16 says nothing of fig trees...read your bible I was reading my Bible, read yours , I was talking about Matthew 24:32 As to Matthew 16:28, need to go on into chapter 17 and it continues the story wher after six days Jesus took Peter, James and John up on the mount where they saw his transfiguration. If you don’t believe that was “him in his kingdom “ reference II Peter 1:16 where Peter tells about what they saw that day. Peter says “...we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, BUT WERE WITNESSES OF HIS MAJESTY.” This is Peter tellingof them seeing Jesus in his kingdom on that mount. THIS IS not my interpretation only. I’ve read it on got questions and other places. i wasn't talking to you i was responding to matt10 comments about Jesus which is 8 chapters away from where you are talking...keep up
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Dec 3, 2019 22:44:14 GMT -5
I was reading my Bible, read yours , I was talking about Matthew 24:32 As to Matthew 16:28, need to go on into chapter 17 and it continues the story wher after six days Jesus took Peter, James and John up on the mount where they saw his transfiguration. If you don’t believe that was “him in his kingdom “ reference II Peter 1:16 where Peter tells about what they saw that day. Peter says “...we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, BUT WERE WITNESSES OF HIS MAJESTY.” This is Peter tellingof them seeing Jesus in his kingdom on that mount. THIS IS not my interpretation only. I’ve read it on got questions and other places. i wasn't talking to you i was responding to matt10 comments about Jesus which is 8 chapters away from where you are talking...keep up I know, this has been discussed other times with atheists who’d complained about Jesus saying he’d come before this generation passed away. They aren’t understanding the Bible as to how important the prophecies are in placing the NT.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 3, 2019 23:00:03 GMT -5
Wrong, Wally.
"Scientific papers," -as you refer to them are reviewed and researched and tested to see if the same results are found. If they can't be replicated they are rejected.
Believers do NOT put the bible to such tough standards. Even when the bible contradicts it's self, -you & others will twist it into pretzels in an attempt to make it fit. the bible is the most researched and reviewed document that has ever existed in history and with time(sometimes a lot of time), meditation, prayer, revelation, and reading has rarely been found wanting... The bible may be the "most researched and reviewed document", but just look at how MANY different interpretations there are of the 'document?'
Aside from the three main Abrahamic religions based the bible; -Judaism , Christianity , and Islam; - there are thousands of Christian denominations alone!
Then also look at all the dispute as to what is the RIGHT interpretation between people right here on TMB!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2019 23:35:21 GMT -5
The Bible is not very defined. Very much open to your own interpretation. Hence all the argument, and the more than 4000 Christian denominations.
Writing a University Research paper is a much different process to the way the Bible was written. The paper is open to argument and discussion, and amended where appropriate. A research paper should contain an opinion, but it is important this opinion be supported with some documents and other reliable sources.
|
|
|
Post by benar on Dec 4, 2019 0:26:43 GMT -5
There's no miraculous things that persuade, convince, or sway a person to believe, its simply a choice and then received by faith. For myself, faith is not blind, there is archaeological, historical, and prophetic evidence that substantiate the bible. Archeology isn't proof per se, but it is evidence that the cities existed and that people mentioned also existed at the time. When landmarks and historical figures are real and accurate, it lends credibility that the authors recording said events were not fabricating a fairy tale. Imo, it requires more belief to spin it off as something fake. Perhaps this is so because you misunderstand what constitutes evidence. The fact that the comics of Spiderman are set in New York, a real place, in no way validates the stories as true. Then we have the evidence that contradicts the Bible - two that come to mind are Nazareth and Exodus. When a source is used to validate itself we call it circular logic. The fact that something 'predicted' in one source and is subsequently 'fulfilled' in that same source, gives absolutely no weight to the story being true. The Terminator predicts a war between man and machine, that is later 'fulfilled' in the third movie. Does that prove that this even actually took place? Of course not. To determine if it did we need to look at outside sources. 'Prophecies' can be made to look true if they were written after the fact, for example, or a later story (itself untrue) written to fulfil and earlier story. And they do. We have no corroborating evidence for Jesus' existence, let alone the miracles he was said to perform. Add in the fact that these miracles are re-telling of earlier myths and exploits of god god-men and it becomes highly suggestive of the stories of Jesus being mythical too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 1:40:47 GMT -5
I’m not exactly sure which point of mine you are addressing here but you appear to be arguing that because archaeological or historical evidence confirms that SOME of the landmarks or places or people named in certain books of the bible actually did exist, then this is evidence that EVERYTHING in the bible is true including stories of the ascension of Jesus up to heaven and of people turning into pillars of salt. If this is indeed the argument you are making, it is so obviously flawed that it hardly needs pointing out. Using this argument it would follow that because the Quran makes reference to people or places that actually did exist, then this lends credibility to the story of the prophet Mohammad flying to heaven on a winged horse. No reasonably intelligent person could possibly accept such an argument. Choosing to believe stories such as the resurrection of Jesus on the basis that you find it difficult to believe that so many people would believe the story if it wasn’t true, ignores the fact that when you have the might of the Roman empire and the Roman Catholic church helping to propagate a myth, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that so many people fall for it. It is also worth pointing out that what you choose to believe has absolutely no bearing on the facts. People falling for religious myths are as old as time itself whether it’s the 2x2 church’s claim that it wasn’t started by a man, the Catholic Church’s claim that the communion wine turns into the actual blood of Christ, Joseph Smith’s claim that God sent him down some plates or Islam’s claim that the prophet Mohammad sawed the moon in half. Religious indoctrination has a tendency to make people susceptible to believing anything no matter how incredible the belief is. Religion has demonstrated that it has the capacity to make otherwise intelligent people behave foolishly. Once you start believing in tales of talking donkeys and speaking serpents you really have to start having a good look at your beliefs. Finally I think you may have overlooked my point that there is simply no credible evidence to prove that the stories of the (supposed) resurrection and the (supposed) accession of Jesus up to heaven are factually correct and that a much more credible explanation is that these stories were simply made up and written down many years after the events were alleged to have taken place. It therefore makes no sense to claim that the occurrence of such events fulfil prophecy as the more credible explanation is that they were simply made up in order to make it LOOK like prophecy was fulfilled. It is also worth remembering that the great biblical prophecy that Jesus would return soon demonstrates that the bible is a hopelessly unreliable predictor of future events as two thousand years later there is still absolutely no sign of him ever coming back. If your local bus still hadn’t arrived two hours after the timetable had predicted it would, most rational people would conclude that it wasn’t coming. However religious believers are different. They are not rational people. For the religious believer evidence, facts and science are irrelevant; it is all about the belief. If the evidence (or the science or the facts) contradicts the belief they conclude that there must be something wrong with the evidence. If the law of gravity proves that a man dressed in a tunic and sandals can’t ascend up to heaven then there must be something wrong with Newton’s theory of gravitation. This is clearly very stupid. The bible is either a reliable predictor of events or it isn’t. And based on the non return of Jesus it clearly isn’t. And if the bible got something so fundamental to Christianity so spectacularly wrong you can help wondering what else it got wrong. Matt10
My point was that most of the cities mentioned in the new testament have been authenticated, and some of the people like the High Priest Caiaphas, Pontius Pilate, and King Herod were real characters that lived during the time of Christ. This doesn't prove the gospels, but it does lend credibility that the places and people were real. The bodies of Mohammed, Buddha, Confucius, and other religious leaders are in their graves, but the tomb of Christ is mysteriously empty.
Yes, the gospels could be fabricated tales, there is no objective evidence. But there is subjective evidence, especially in the prophecies I mentioned, where there is no way that the prophecy of Isaiah or Daniel could have been fabricated because they accurately predicted historical events, which could not have been made-up to fulfill prophecy. Sometimes a truth is derived from the preponderance of evidence, whereby belief can be a logical conclusion formed by rational people.
I agree with your comments about the Catholic Church, Joseph Smith, and Mohammad, nothing divine there. Also, I don't believe in talking snakes, the serpent was Satan. Balaam heard the angel of the Lord and mistakenly thought the donkey was speaking until the angel materialized. Jesus didn't say his return would be soon, some misread his saying that he would come quickly, but that simply means it would be immediate at the 7th trump.
The laws of science are only applicable to what we can physically observe. Consider that a God who established the law of gravity could also defy it. God is not bound by science, nor can he be proven in any science book. Science says that in the beginning there was nothing, and then nothing exploded! How rational or logical is that belief?
It’s truly remarkable that in response to an argument that says that the resurrection of Jesus is a made up story youl claim that the fact that the tomb was mysteriously empty provides credible evidence that it wasn’t. You’re basically confirming the point made elsewhere that belief in the bible is an exercise in circular thinking and that the bible must be true because it says so. There is clearly no other evidence to support the bible being true and therefore the believer must rely on the bible itself as evidence. It’s a completely different topic of course but I am interested to know how you came to the conclusion that God is not bound by science. What evidence do you have to show that God is not bound by science? Do you have a single example other than a (likely made up) biblical story that proves that God is not bound by science? I had a long and interesting debate with your fellow believer Wally last week in which he conceded that I could use the term ‘magic’ to describe how (his) God operated as it was impossible for him to differentiate between the process by which magic operated and the process by which (his) God operated. You appear to be making a similar point in that magic is not bound by science. We seem to be moving swiftly towards the conclusion that the Christian God is a magician with magical powers. If this is in fact what you are claiming I would find it very difficult to argue against it and there is certainly more evidence to support the view that God is a magician than the view that God is all powerful and has the power to heal amputated limbs. Matt10
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 4, 2019 1:43:31 GMT -5
There's no miraculous things that persuade, convince, or sway a person to believe, its simply a choice and then received by faith. For myself, faith is not blind, there is archaeological, historical, and prophetic evidence that substantiate the bible. Archeology isn't proof per se, but it is evidence that the cities existed and that people mentioned also existed at the time. When landmarks and historical figures are real and accurate, it lends credibility that the authors recording said events were not fabricating a fairy tale. Imo, it requires more belief to spin it off as something fake.
You can certainly write-off fulfilled prophecies as a hoax, but I choose to believe them because it would have required one hell of a collaborated effort to pull off the greatest scam in history. Plus, how do you explain the prophecy in Daniel 7? There is absolutely no way that this future prophecy predicting the rise & fall of 4 ruling kingdoms could have been arranged to coincide with future events ( Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, & Rome). Quite a coincidence? Not to mention Christ predicting that he would rise from his grave in 3 days. Even with Roman soldiers guarding the tomb, there's no body. And the predicted destruction of the temple, Rome obviously didn't destroy it to coincide with prophecy.
Prophecy also predicted the Jews would reject Christ (Isaiah 6:9-10). Christ reiterated it (John 12:40, Matthew 13:14) and so did Paul (Acts28:26). Its no accident that they are blinded to this day, so it was written and so it is.. When you have so many prophecies come to pass and none that have failed or been proven false, the accumulative coincidences can certainly be construed and weighed as solid evidence by anyone with common sense.. Consider Isaiah's prophecy of King Cyrus of Persia in chapter 45, not only predicting his reign 150 years in advance, but referring to him by name! It certainly seems to me that all of that biblical dogma has a remarkable record of accidental accuracy.
There's comes a point where biblical stories and prophecies would fall apart if they were fabricated lies. But that hasn't happened for some unexplained reason. I guess its just very difficult, if not impossible to cast doubt on the truth. It makes no difference whether others take it or leave it, I'm just here stating my reasons for believing it.
There are different kinds of writing in the bible as I sure most people know. Since history is supposed to based on actual happenings, no doubt it was based at least loosely on the facts they had.
But "prophecy" is totally different. It shows nothing that happened at the time, but only in someone's mind that is suppose to happen in the future. Prophecies are so often worded in such a vague way that just about anything that anyone wants to believe can fit into it.
Take Nostradamus who published a book in 1555 containing 942 quatrains that allegedly predict famous future events.
Observers have come across a handful of predictions that due seem to reflect real world events.
But in reality, -most of Nostradamus' prophecies are so vaguely worded that they invite a lot of of speculation as being fulfilled and different fulfillments of the same prophecy!
Dan, you say that "prophecy also predicted the Jews would reject Christ (Isaiah 6:9-10)" Isaiah 6:9-10 9 And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.King James Version (KJV)
What I can't understand is just can anyone see those verses to mean anything about Jesus being rejected by the Jews?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 2:11:15 GMT -5
My point was that most of the cities mentioned in the new testament have been authenticated, and some of the people like the High Priest Caiaphas, Pontius Pilate, and King Herod were real characters that lived during the time of Christ. This doesn't prove the gospels, but it does lend credibility that the places and people were real. The bodies of Mohammed, Buddha, Confucius, and other religious leaders are in their graves, but the tomb of Christ is mysteriously empty.
Yes, the gospels could be fabricated tales, there is no objective evidence. But there is subjective evidence, especially in the prophecies I mentioned, where there is no way that the prophecy of Isaiah or Daniel could have been fabricated because they accurately predicted historical events, which could not have been made-up to fulfill prophecy. Sometimes a truth is derived from the preponderance of evidence, whereby belief can be a logical conclusion formed by rational people.
I agree with your comments about the Catholic Church, Joseph Smith, and Mohammad, nothing divine there. Also, I don't believe in talking snakes, the serpent was Satan. Balaam heard the angel of the Lord and mistakenly thought the donkey was speaking until the angel materialized. Jesus didn't say his return would be soon, some misread his saying that he would come quickly, but that simply means it would be immediate at the 7th trump.
The laws of science are only applicable to what we can physically observe. Consider that a God who established the law of gravity could also defy it. God is not bound by science, nor can he be proven in any science book. Science says that in the beginning there was nothing, and then nothing exploded! How rational or logical is that belief?
It’s truly remarkable that in response to an argument that says that the resurrection of Jesus is a made up story youl claim that the fact that the tomb was mysteriously empty provides credible evidence that it wasn’t. You’re basically confirming the point made elsewhere that belief in the bible is an exercise in circular thinking and that the bible must be true because it says so. There is clearly no other evidence to support the bible being true and therefore the believer must rely on the bible itself as evidence. It’s a completely different topic of course but I am interested to know how you came to the conclusion that God is not bound by science. What evidence do you have to show that God is not bound by science? Do you have a single example other than a (likely made up) biblical story that proves that God is not bound by science? I had a long and interesting debate with your fellow believer Wally last week in which he conceded that I should use the term ‘magic’ to describe how (his) God operated as it was impossible for him to differentiate between the process by which magic operated and the process by which (his) God operated. You appear to be making a similar point in that magic is not bound by science. We seem to be moving swiftly towards the conclusion that the Christian God is a magician with magical powers. If this is in fact what you are claiming I would find it very difficult to argue against it and there is certainly more evidence to support the view that God is a magician than the view that God is all powerful and has the power to heal amputated limbs. Matt10 well LOGIC tells me that if there is a God he would be the one that created the science in the first place if science exists in HIS universe...he wouldn't be God if the universe is in control of him or if its not under his control...think about it your not telling the truth i said you CAN NOT SHOULD use the term magic if YOU WANT and i was going to use the term spiritually enacted process....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 2:25:26 GMT -5
It’s truly remarkable that in response to an argument that says that the resurrection of Jesus is a made up story youl claim that the fact that the tomb was mysteriously empty provides credible evidence that it wasn’t. You’re basically confirming the point made elsewhere that belief in the bible is an exercise in circular thinking and that the bible must be true because it says so. There is clearly no other evidence to support the bible being true and therefore the believer must rely on the bible itself as evidence. It’s a completely different topic of course but I am interested to know how you came to the conclusion that God is not bound by science. What evidence do you have to show that God is not bound by science? Do you have a single example other than a (likely made up) biblical story that proves that God is not bound by science? I had a long and interesting debate with your fellow believer Wally last week in which he conceded that I could use the term ‘magic’ to describe how (his) God operated as it was impossible for him to differentiate between the process by which magic operated and the process by which (his) God operated. You appear to be making a similar point in that magic is not bound by science. We seem to be moving swiftly towards the conclusion that the Christian God is a magician with magical powers. If this is in fact what you are claiming I would find it very difficult to argue against it and there is certainly more evidence to support the view that God is a magician than the view that God is all powerful and has the power to heal amputated limbs. Matt10 well LOGIC tells me that if there is a God he would be the one that created the science in the first place if science exists in HIS universe...he wouldn't be God if the universe is in control of him or if its not under his control...think about it your not telling the truth i said you CAN NOT SHOULD use the term magic if YOU WANT and i was going to use the term spiritually enacted process.... Thanks for pointing that out, I’ve edited it to say could now rather than should. Accuracy is important. Matt10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 2:39:49 GMT -5
This thread is developing into the argument that happens all the time, Religion versus Science. Don't think that is going to be much help to Cider, who started this thread. Personally I prefer to remain an agnostic,omnist. Omnism is the recognition and respect of all religions or lack thereof; those who hold this belief are called omonists. We must understand that it depends how we are wired, something we have no say in. Some like stories, fiction, others only want facts. The way to peace and happiness is to follow the way our mind works. It is always each to their own.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 2:46:32 GMT -5
This thread is developing into the argument that happens all the time, Religion versus Science. Don't think that is going to be much help to Cider, who started this thread. Personally I prefer to remain an agnostic,omnist. Omnism is the recognition and respect of all religions or lack thereof; those who hold this belief are called omonists. We must understand that it depends how we are wired, something we have no say in. Some like stories, fiction, others only want facts. The way to peace and happiness is to follow the way our mind works. It is always each to their own. thats what oprah is....which is like crossing the street midway instead of at the cross walk your gonna get slammed from every direction....
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Dec 4, 2019 4:11:31 GMT -5
There's no miraculous things that persuade, convince, or sway a person to believe, its simply a choice and then received by faith. For myself, faith is not blind, there is archaeological, historical, and prophetic evidence that substantiate the bible. Archeology isn't proof per se, but it is evidence that the cities existed and that people mentioned also existed at the time. When landmarks and historical figures are real and accurate, it lends credibility that the authors recording said events were not fabricating a fairy tale. Imo, it requires more belief to spin it off as something fake.
You can certainly write-off fulfilled prophecies as a hoax, but I choose to believe them because it would have required one hell of a collaborated effort to pull off the greatest scam in history. Plus, how do you explain the prophecy in Daniel 7? There is absolutely no way that this future prophecy predicting the rise & fall of 4 ruling kingdoms could have been arranged to coincide with future events ( Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, & Rome). Quite a coincidence? Not to mention Christ predicting that he would rise from his grave in 3 days. Even with Roman soldiers guarding the tomb, there's no body. And the predicted destruction of the temple, Rome obviously didn't destroy it to coincide with prophecy.
Prophecy also predicted the Jews would reject Christ (Isaiah 6:9-10). Christ reiterated it (John 12:40, Matthew 13:14) and so did Paul (Acts28:26). Its no accident that they are blinded to this day, so it was written and so it is.. When you have so many prophecies come to pass and none that have failed or been proven false, the accumulative coincidences can certainly be construed and weighed as solid evidence by anyone with common sense.. Consider Isaiah's prophecy of King Cyrus of Persia in chapter 45, not only predicting his reign 150 years in advance, but referring to him by name! It certainly seems to me that all of that biblical dogma has a remarkable record of accidental accuracy.
There's comes a point where biblical stories and prophecies would fall apart if they were fabricated lies. But that hasn't happened for some unexplained reason. I guess its just very difficult, if not impossible to cast doubt on the truth. It makes no difference whether others take it or leave it, I'm just here stating my reasons for believing it.
There are different kinds of writing in the bible as I sure most people know. Since history is supposed to based on actual happenings, no doubt it was based at least loosely on the facts they had.
But "prophecy" is totally different. It shows nothing that happened at the time, but only in someone's mind that is suppose to happen in the future. Prophecies are so often worded in such a vague way that just about anything that anyone wants to believe can fit into it.
Take Nostradamus who published a book in 1555 containing 942 quatrains that allegedly predict famous future events.
Observers have come across a handful of predictions that due seem to reflect real world events.
But in reality, -most of Nostradamus' prophecies are so vaguely worded that they invite a lot of of speculation as being fulfilled and different fulfillments of the same prophecy!
Dan, you say that "prophecy also predicted the Jews would reject Christ (Isaiah 6:9-10)" Isaiah 6:9-10 9 And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.King James Version (KJV)
What I can't understand is just can anyone see those verses to mean anything about Jesus being rejected by the Jews?
Jesus quoted those verses several times in regards to why he had to speak to them in parables. Also it is evident it’s a prophecy about Israelites being removed from their land, the land be unproductive and infertile. Which did happen. The reason was the 7 Jubilee years they did not keep as commanded. So they had to pay back those 70 years. Then in Ezekiel we see God’s promise to make Israel fertile again and bring the Jews back into their land, be recognized as a nation and will be a nation until there is no moon, sun nor stars shining. The land was not fertile in 1851 when Samuel Clements visited Israel. No growth, no people. The Jews are back in their country , the land is fertile and they just celebrated their 71st anniversary as a recognized nation. Prophecies are fulfilled, but people are getting the issue that not all prophecies have been fulfilled and that some are being fulfilled right before our very eyes.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Dec 4, 2019 4:12:19 GMT -5
This thread is developing into the argument that happens all the time, Religion versus Science. Don't think that is going to be much help to Cider, who started this thread. Personally I prefer to remain an agnostic,omnist. Omnism is the recognition and respect of all religions or lack thereof; those who hold this belief are called omonists. We must understand that it depends how we are wired, something we have no say in. Some like stories, fiction, others only want facts. The way to peace and happiness is to follow the way our mind works. It is always each to their own. I think Cider gave up on the thread already.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 4:29:25 GMT -5
Good on you Wally, we love you. You are always true to form. Definitely not an Omnist. Each to their own.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 4:35:41 GMT -5
This thread is developing into the argument that happens all the time, Religion versus Science. Don't think that is going to be much help to Cider, who started this thread. Personally I prefer to remain an agnostic,omnist. Omnism is the recognition and respect of all religions or lack thereof; those who hold this belief are called omonists. We must understand that it depends how we are wired, something we have no say in. Some like stories, fiction, others only want facts. The way to peace and happiness is to follow the way our mind works. It is always each to their own. Unfortunately not everyone finds peace and happiness by following their own chosen path. And we must always be mindful of the snake oil salesmen seeking to prey on the unhappy and discontented selling their version of eternal peace and happiness. You can’t be too careful. There is a group permanently encamped outside my local railway station targeting commuters on their way to work with posters saying things such as ‘Is this life all there is?’. The 2x2 church engages in similar conduct going into the highways and byways selling something that isn’t there. I see no issue on challenging people selling fiction as fact whether it’s here or anywhere else. If what you are selling is true it should stand up to scrutiny. If what you are selling is merely your own beliefs then people should be clear on that. Matt10
|
|
|
Post by benar on Dec 4, 2019 6:39:10 GMT -5
This thread is developing into the argument that happens all the time, Religion versus Science. Don't think that is going to be much help to Cider, who started this thread. Personally I prefer to remain an agnostic,omnist. Omnism is the recognition and respect of all religions or lack thereof; those who hold this belief are called omonists. We must understand that it depends how we are wired, something we have no say in. Some like stories, fiction, others only want facts. The way to peace and happiness is to follow the way our mind works. It is always each to their own. I think Cider gave up on the thread already. I hope Cider is lurking. This may not apply to her, but sometimes, when someone is struggling with their faith it's due to a semi-conscious realisation that not everything is adding up. When it comes to the Christian faith, there's good reason it doesn't add up. Hopefully anyone in such a situation explores some of the suggestions made here and examines the logic behind the claims being presented. It may be just what they need.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Dec 4, 2019 11:14:36 GMT -5
I think Cider gave up on the thread already. I hope Cider is lurking. This may not apply to her, but sometimes, when someone is struggling with their faith it's due to a semi-conscious realisation that not everything is adding up. When it comes to the Christian faith, there's good reason it doesn't add up. Hopefully anyone in such a situation explores some of the suggestions made here and examines the logic behind the claims being presented. It may be just what they need. Her thread has become overwhelming.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Dec 4, 2019 13:59:53 GMT -5
When a source is used to validate itself we call it circular logic. The fact that something 'predicted' in one source and is subsequently 'fulfilled' in that same source, gives absolutely no weight to the story being true. The Terminator predicts a war between man and machine, that is later 'fulfilled' in the third movie. Does that prove that this even actually took place? Of course not. To determine if it did we need to look at outside sources. 'Prophecies' can be made to look true if they were written after the fact, for example, or a later story (itself untrue) written to fulfil and earlier story. And they do. We have no corroborating evidence for Jesus' existence, let alone the miracles he was said to perform. Add in the fact that these miracles are re-telling of earlier myths and exploits of god god-men and it becomes highly suggestive of the stories of Jesus being mythical too. The bible consist of multiple sources, not one. It was written over a period of 1400 to 1800 years by more than 40 different authors. So the bible does not fulfill itself in a prophetic sense. When Isaiah named King Cyrus of Persia over 150 years in advance, history fulfilled the prophecy. When Daniel saw the 4 future kingdoms, the bible did not validate itself, the kingdoms that came to be did. So imo, no circular logic about it, and it can't be compared to a movie that selects its own ending.
There is no direct or tangible evidence of Christ, but there are witnesses and more written about him than Julius Caesar. It comes down to belief, but Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 certainly seem to describe the Messiah.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Dec 4, 2019 14:20:14 GMT -5
It’s truly remarkable that in response to an argument that says that the resurrection of Jesus is a made up story youl claim that the fact that the tomb was mysteriously empty provides credible evidence that it wasn’t. You’re basically confirming the point made elsewhere that belief in the bible is an exercise in circular thinking and that the bible must be true because it says so. There is clearly no other evidence to support the bible being true and therefore the believer must rely on the bible itself as evidence. It’s a completely different topic of course but I am interested to know how you came to the conclusion that God is not bound by science. What evidence do you have to show that God is not bound by science? Do you have a single example other than a (likely made up) biblical story that proves that God is not bound by science? I had a long and interesting debate with your fellow believer Wally last week in which he conceded that I could use the term ‘magic’ to describe how (his) God operated as it was impossible for him to differentiate between the process by which magic operated and the process by which (his) God operated. You appear to be making a similar point in that magic is not bound by science. We seem to be moving swiftly towards the conclusion that the Christian God is a magician with magical powers. If this is in fact what you are claiming I would find it very difficult to argue against it and there is certainly more evidence to support the view that God is a magician than the view that God is all powerful and has the power to heal amputated limbs. Matt10
I'm simply stating that the body of Christ was never found, despite the Pharisee's being aware of the prophecy and asking Pontius Pilate to guard the tomb. Evidence swings both ways, if someone tells me that Christ didn't resurrect, my first question is where's the body? I do agree, the bible is its own best evidence.
God is bound by nothing; "With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26). God is Spirit, not bound by space, matter, time, etc. Science is limited to physical observation, God is beyond that.
A miracle is simply something we don't understand, but once its understood, its not a miracle anymore, i.e; a man walking on the moon would be construed as a miracle or myth a few hundred years ago.. God is the uncaused cause of all that is, so nothing is a miracle once a person believes that. God is not a magician, He's simply omnipotent.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Dec 4, 2019 14:39:33 GMT -5
Dan, you say that "prophecy also predicted the Jews would reject Christ (Isaiah 6:9-10)" Isaiah 6:9-10 9 And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.King James Version (KJV)
What I can't understand is just can anyone see those verses to mean anything about Jesus being rejected by the Jews?
Its true that a person can misconstrue verses to mean or refer to different things, but I'm relatively certain that Isaiah 6:10 is a prophecy that Israel will reject their messiah due to spiritual blindness. The New Testament confirms that this occurred; Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. (John 12:39-41, margin refers to Is 6:10).
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 4, 2019 15:03:37 GMT -5
I’m not exactly sure which point of mine you are addressing here but you appear to be arguing that because archaeological or historical evidence confirms that SOME of the landmarks or places or people named in certain books of the bible actually did exist, then this is evidence that EVERYTHING in the bible is true including stories of the ascension of Jesus up to heaven and of people turning into pillars of salt. If this is indeed the argument you are making, it is so obviously flawed that it hardly needs pointing out. Using this argument it would follow that because the Quran makes reference to people or places that actually did exist, then this lends credibility to the story of the prophet Mohammad flying to heaven on a winged horse. No reasonably intelligent person could possibly accept such an argument. Choosing to believe stories such as the resurrection of Jesus on the basis that you find it difficult to believe that so many people would believe the story if it wasn’t true, ignores the fact that when you have the might of the Roman empire and the Roman Catholic church helping to propagate a myth, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that so many people fall for it. It is also worth pointing out that what you choose to believe has absolutely no bearing on the facts. People falling for religious myths are as old as time itself whether it’s the 2x2 church’s claim that it wasn’t started by a man, the Catholic Church’s claim that the communion wine turns into the actual blood of Christ, Joseph Smith’s claim that God sent him down some plates or Islam’s claim that the prophet Mohammad sawed the moon in half. Religious indoctrination has a tendency to make people susceptible to believing anything no matter how incredible the belief is. Religion has demonstrated that it has the capacity to make otherwise intelligent people behave foolishly. Once you start believing in tales of talking donkeys and speaking serpents you really have to start having a good look at your beliefs. Finally I think you may have overlooked my point that there is simply no credible evidence to suggest that the stories of the (supposed) resurrection and the (supposed) accession of Jesus up to heaven are factually correct and that a much more credible explanation is that these stories were simply made up and written down many years after the events were alleged to have taken place. It therefore makes no sense to claim that the occurrence of such events fulfil prophecy as the more credible explanation is that they were simply made up in order to make it LOOK like prophecy was fulfilled. It is also worth remembering that the great biblical prophecy that Jesus would return soon demonstrates that the bible is a hopelessly unreliable predictor of future events as two thousand years later there is still absolutely no sign of him ever coming back. If your local bus still hadn’t arrived two hours after the timetable had predicted it would, most rational people would conclude that it wasn’t coming. However religious believers are different. They are not rational people. For the religious believer evidence, facts and science are irrelevant; it is all about the belief. If the evidence (or the science or the facts) contradicts the belief they conclude that there must be something wrong with the evidence. If the law of gravity proves that a man dressed in a tunic and sandals can’t ascend up to heaven then there must be something wrong with Newton’s theory of gravitation. This is clearly very stupid. The bible is either a reliable predictor of events or it isn’t. And based on the non return of Jesus it clearly isn’t. Matt10 its doesn't say he would return soon it says some standing there would not taste of death until his return...read your bible What's the difference? He obviously told them he would return within some of their lifespans. Since they are dead and he hasn't returned I don't understand your argument?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 4, 2019 15:05:50 GMT -5
I’m not exactly sure which point of mine you are addressing here but you appear to be arguing that because archaeological or historical evidence confirms that SOME of the landmarks or places or people named in certain books of the bible actually did exist, then this is evidence that EVERYTHING in the bible is true including stories of the ascension of Jesus up to heaven and of people turning into pillars of salt. If this is indeed the argument you are making, it is so obviously flawed that it hardly needs pointing out. Using this argument it would follow that because the Quran makes reference to people or places that actually did exist, then this lends credibility to the story of the prophet Mohammad flying to heaven on a winged horse. No reasonably intelligent person could possibly accept such an argument. Choosing to believe stories such as the resurrection of Jesus on the basis that you find it difficult to believe that so many people would believe the story if it wasn’t true, ignores the fact that when you have the might of the Roman empire and the Roman Catholic church helping to propagate a myth, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that so many people fall for it. It is also worth pointing out that what you choose to believe has absolutely no bearing on the facts. People falling for religious myths are as old as time itself whether it’s the 2x2 church’s claim that it wasn’t started by a man, the Catholic Church’s claim that the communion wine turns into the actual blood of Christ, Joseph Smith’s claim that God sent him down some plates or Islam’s claim that the prophet Mohammad sawed the moon in half. Religious indoctrination has a tendency to make people susceptible to believing anything no matter how incredible the belief is. Religion has demonstrated that it has the capacity to make otherwise intelligent people behave foolishly. Once you start believing in tales of talking donkeys and speaking serpents you really have to start having a good look at your beliefs. Finally I think you may have overlooked my point that there is simply no credible evidence to prove that the stories of the (supposed) resurrection and the (supposed) accession of Jesus up to heaven are factually correct and that a much more credible explanation is that these stories were simply made up and written down many years after the events were alleged to have taken place. It therefore makes no sense to claim that the occurrence of such events fulfil prophecy as the more credible explanation is that they were simply made up in order to make it LOOK like prophecy was fulfilled. It is also worth remembering that the great biblical prophecy that Jesus would return soon demonstrates that the bible is a hopelessly unreliable predictor of future events as two thousand years later there is still absolutely no sign of him ever coming back. If your local bus still hadn’t arrived two hours after the timetable had predicted it would, most rational people would conclude that it wasn’t coming. However religious believers are different. They are not rational people. For the religious believer evidence, facts and science are irrelevant; it is all about the belief. If the evidence (or the science or the facts) contradicts the belief they conclude that there must be something wrong with the evidence. If the law of gravity proves that a man dressed in a tunic and sandals can’t ascend up to heaven then there must be something wrong with Newton’s theory of gravitation. This is clearly very stupid. The bible is either a reliable predictor of events or it isn’t. And based on the non return of Jesus it clearly isn’t. And if the bible got something so fundamental to Christianity so spectacularly wrong you can help wondering what else it got wrong. Matt10 My point was that most of the cities mentioned in the new testament have been authenticated, and some of the people like the High Priest Caiaphas, Pontius Pilate, and King Herod were real characters that lived during the time of Christ. This doesn't prove the gospels, but it does lend credibility that the places and people were real. The bodies of Mohammed, Buddha, Confucius, and other religious leaders are in their graves, but the tomb of Christ is mysteriously empty.
Yes, the gospels could be fabricated tales, there is no objective evidence. But there is subjective evidence, especially in the prophecies I mentioned, where there is no way that the prophecy of Isaiah or Daniel could have been fabricated because they accurately predicted historical events, which could not have been made-up to fulfill prophecy. Sometimes a truth is derived from the preponderance of evidence, whereby belief can be a logical conclusion formed by rational people. I agree with your comments about the Catholic Church, Joseph Smith, and Mohammad, nothing divine there. Also, I don't believe in talking snakes, the serpent was Satan. Balaam heard the angel of the Lord and mistakenly thought the donkey was speaking until the angel materialized. Jesus didn't say his return would be soon, some misread his saying that he would come quickly, but that simply means it would be immediate at the 7th trump. The laws of science are only applicable to what we can physically observe. Consider that a God who established the law of gravity could also defy it. God is not bound by science, nor can he be proven in any science book. Science says that in the beginning there was nothing, and then nothing exploded! How rational or logical is that belief?
Maybe his Israel grave is empty because he really didn't die. That they got him out of Israel and he went back to India. There is a grave in India that claims to be the grave of Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by mountain on Dec 4, 2019 16:04:53 GMT -5
One opinion about what Jesus said to his disciples in Matthew 16:28 is that Jesus was meaning that some standing there would see Jesus in his Kingdom before they died. We have the example of Stephen and no doubt some of the twelve had similar experiences as they faced brutal deaths? Matthew 16 28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Acts 7 54 Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him. 55 But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 And he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” 57 But they cried out with a loud voice and stopped their ears and rushed together at him.
58 Then they cast him out of the city and stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul.
59 And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”
(Virgs)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 19:03:21 GMT -5
its doesn't say he would return soon it says some standing there would not taste of death until his return...read your bible What's the difference? He obviously told them he would return within some of their lifespans. Since they are dead and he hasn't returned I don't understand your argument? its like when your mother punishes you then says wait till your father gets home and you'll really get it...the taste of death isn't your first death its the 2nd death....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 20:03:03 GMT -5
Come on Wally, that is all pure speculation. Why fill your mind with imaginings, enjoy today, tomorrow will take care of itself. It is a bit like when you were in your Mother's womb, not a worry in the World. Then without warning you are thrown into the World. A traumatic moment in time, but you soon learn to cope. So as far as I am concerned I don't worry about death. If there is an afterlife we will cope, the same as we have on earth.
Remember what is written in the Bible are just assumptions from the minds of Humans. Nobody on Earth knows if there is anything beyond this life. Nobody has returned to tell us.
Wally you don't have any more knowledge of what takes place after death, than anyone of us does. And what we know is zilch.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 21:07:51 GMT -5
Remember what is written in the Bible are just assumptions from the minds of Humans. Nobody on Earth knows if there is anything beyond this life. Nobody has returned to tell us. how quickly we forget what we have read in the bible...Jesus Christ ring a bell?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 21:19:52 GMT -5
A good story book Wally, the way my mind works, I try and stick with reality and facts. Jesus Christ does't that make sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2019 21:38:18 GMT -5
A good story book Wally, the way my mind works, I try and stick with reality and facts. Jesus Christ does't that make sense. a large portion of history is in books and documents and not material or archeological you must have trouble believing much of history....
|
|