kallend 2,183
well, this thread proves that at least THIS part is true:
Quote31"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "
Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
billvon 3,132
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>As far as the Bible being a book of contradictions and false hoods ---- rubbish!
It is indeed full of contradictions and falsehoods if one reads it like a science book or a history text, which far too many people do. If it's read as the spiritual basis of a religion there is a lot that can be learned from it. Unfortunately some very religious types cannot stand to see it described as anything but perfect in all aspects, and some atheist types cannot stand to see any value in it at all IMO both are missing the point.
It is indeed full of contradictions and falsehoods if one reads it like a science book or a history text, which far too many people do. If it's read as the spiritual basis of a religion there is a lot that can be learned from it. Unfortunately some very religious types cannot stand to see it described as anything but perfect in all aspects, and some atheist types cannot stand to see any value in it at all IMO both are missing the point.
JackC 0
QuoteIt is indeed full of contradictions and falsehoods if one reads it like a science book or a history text, which far too many people do. If it's read as the spiritual basis of a religion there is a lot that can be learned from it. Unfortunately some very religious types cannot stand to see it described as anything but perfect in all aspects, and some atheist types cannot stand to see any value in it at all IMO both are missing the point.
The point is that even thought the Bible may contain some lessons, it also full of contradictions and falsehoods and you don't need to read it like a science book or a history text to see them. So if you want to read the bible with any type of rationalism intact, you have to filter it through your own internal bullshit detector. For a book that claims to be the "truth", doesn't it strike you as odd that you have to throw away all notions of science and history, rationalism and logic in order to read it? It's not that the Bible has no value, just that it has no more value than say Homer's Odyssey or that other great literary work, Viz Magazine.
JackC 0
Quote
well, this thread proves that at least THIS part is true:Quote31"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "
You obviously didn't get my point so here is the relevant part of the passage again (John 20:25)
"So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it.""
Thomas couldn't beleive without evidence and neither can I. In Thomas's case, he got evidence in the form of a resurrected dead man/god. I got nothin'. Ergo, Abraham was wrong.
No, Abraham was not wrong.
From the parable's standpoint, Abraham is saying there are those who would not believe no matter what evidence is given. (He equates that person as one who has already disregarded the testimony of the the OT as it refers to JC)
While Thomas was given more evidence than let's say you or I, he was obviously not in the group Abraham referred to.
steveOrino
From the parable's standpoint, Abraham is saying there are those who would not believe no matter what evidence is given. (He equates that person as one who has already disregarded the testimony of the the OT as it refers to JC)
While Thomas was given more evidence than let's say you or I, he was obviously not in the group Abraham referred to.
steveOrino
jakee 1,611
Quote
well, this thread proves that at least THIS part is true:Quote31"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "
Oh really? Could you perchance point out to me again where you showed us someone actually raising from the dead? No? You can't? Because you didn't actually show us someone raising from the dead? Then stop talking complete bollocks.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
DannHuff 0
Quote>some very religious types cannot stand to see it described as anything but perfect in all aspects,
"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless."
It is the Bible that claims it is flawless. This is either true or its not. If it is not, then why would you bother believing any of it. If it is true then you are held accountable to it. One should settle this for themselves....
jpjc2000 0
The bible...IMHO...was written by one of of the best sales people to ever live!
JackC 0
QuoteNo, Abraham was not wrong.
From the parable's standpoint, Abraham is saying there are those who would not believe no matter what evidence is given. (He equates that person as one who has already disregarded the testimony of the the OT as it refers to JC)
While Thomas was given more evidence than let's say you or I, he was obviously not in the group Abraham referred to.
Sure there may be some people who have a fixed opinion even with all the evidence in the world but in my experience those people are much more likely to be theists than skeptics. I've asked you several times what evidence it would take (hypothetically) to change your tune on god and you couldn't really come up with an answer. I asked Pajarito that question and he said "I "know" God exists and that His Word is true. I am solid in my belief. Nothing will ever change that". You guys seem to fit Abrahams definition more than me since I actually will be swayed by the evidence.
Now as I see it Abraham was refering to the rich mans brothers that they woudn't believe even with a resurected Lazarus in front of them. But the fact that Thomas was convinced by a resurrected Jesus proves that in principle, people are conviced by dead people coming back to life. So Abraham was wrong in as much as people are swayed by actual evidence as opposed to unsupported assertion.
Jack, you ask me a question that is impossible to answer, which is why I never did. If something does not exist how can you prove it doesn't? You can only hypotheses that you have not found evidence that says otherwise.
But of course now I do believe God exist. That is in my worldview. Plus I believe I have had a personal experience with him. What could invalidate that? Well, I suppose I could change my thinking as to the nature of God and His existence. I know many who have done that very thing and there are many here who have testified to that fact ... they were believers now they are atheists/agnostics.
IF I were to change, I would surmise it would be as they did ... a change in thinking/understanding, not some archeological fact, etc.
While I understand how you believe I'm incapable of that change in thinking, I believe I am. I know I have changed my theories on the OT and even the NT. I'm still mulling through what it means to be "in Christ" So I don't think it is fair to say I have a "fixed" position. You say you are open to change your belief and for that I'm glad. My prayer is that God will reveal Himself to you in such a way you will believe that JC is who he claims to be. 
steveOrino
QuoteQuote>some very religious types cannot stand to see it described as anything but perfect in all aspects,
"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless."
It is the Bible that claims it is flawless. This is either true or its not. If it is not, then why would you bother believing any of it. If it is true then you are held accountable to it. One should settle this for themselves....
The passage quoted is from Psalms & 2 Samuel (it is a song) That song of David doesn't claim the Bible is flawless. The Bible claims God's word is flawless. There was no "Bible" when that song was written. So what "word" could he be referring to? Well I believe he was referring to God's commands which were a "type" or "shadow" of that which was to come. The perfect flawless "word of God" can be found in John chapter one, in none other than JC.
steveOrino
JackC 0
QuoteIF I were to change, I would surmise it would be as they did ... a change in thinking/understanding, not some archeological fact, etc.
While I understand how you believe I'm incapable of that change in thinking, I believe I am.
Actually Steve, I think you are more than capable and I agree that you'd have to change you way of thinking rather than dig up some archeological fact. After all, to me god is a philosophy not a fact. Now what would it take for you to change your thinking?
The point I was trying to make was that evidence does sway peoples minds. Abraham said it wouldn't matter, Thomas said it would. I agree with Thomas.
QuoteMy prayer is that God will reveal Himself to you in such a way you will believe that JC is who he claims to be.
Well, you never know your luck but honestly don't bother praying, god knows where to find me. I reckon god would more impressed by the park cleaning efforts I know you do anyway, I certainly am.
QuoteAbraham said it wouldn't matter, Thomas said it would. I agree with Thomas.
I "think" Abraham was saying it wouldn't matter to those who are not open to receive. JC illustrates this principle in Mark 4 with the parable of the sower.
Quotewhat would it take for you to change your thinking?
What changed my previous thinking was more serious study. Would that suffice to change my thinking? I don't know. For some, it did. But even then they have a worldview. that influences their thinking. Take for instance the priests, bishops & pastors of the Jesus Seminar. As they vote with their different colored stones about the vaildity of JCs word, they state they do not believe certain passages to be accurate because they do not believe JC was divine.
steveOrino
JackC 0
QuoteI "think" Abraham was saying it wouldn't matter to those who are not open to receive.
Who but a complete idiot wouldn't be swayed by evidence presented in front of their very eyes? If the evidence is strong enough, all but the most stubborn of people will believe. You will have a hard time convincing a skeptic without it though. Abraham just dismissed the idea of presenting evidence out of hand saying it wouldn't matter but it does.
QuoteWho but a complete idiot wouldn't be swayed by evidence presented in front of their very eyes? If the evidence is strong enough, all but the most stubborn of people will believe.
What do you define as evidence? Should only those who saw believe? What about the personal testimony of those who also saw?
steveOrino
JackC 0
QuoteWhat do you define as evidence? Should only those who saw believe? What about the personal testimony of those who also saw?
Evidence would be facts that indicate whether or not a particular hypothesis is true. For example, the apparent violation of the law of conservation of momentum during radioactive beta decay was the evidence that eventually lead to the discovery of the Neutrino. Bronze age mythology is not evidence of god, only that bronze age nomads in the middle east thought god existed. A tree is not evidence that there is a creator of trees, it's only evidence that trees exist. In order to have evidence that some sort of god exists you're going to have to come up with something that can only be explained by the god hypothesis and can survive being prodded, poked and tested up the wazzoo for many many eons to come.
Eye witness testimony isn't particularly good evidence. It might lend weight in a court of law, but in science terms it's pretty flimsy. It's certainly not enough to warrant the suspension of rational thought needed to believe in a biblical god.
That moves us back to the fact belief in God is not based on science, but on faith. I think we've been down this road before. 
steveOrino
Ha ha - you obviously misunderstood his point.
No I didn't, there is the group of people that won't see the Truth no matter what, there is another group who after much prodding from God will finally get it, and then their is a group, humble in spirit, who see God from the very beginning.
As far as the Bible being a book of contradictions and false hoods ---- rubbish!
The bible IS full of contradictions and inaccuracies, and invoking a mythical being with supernatural powers to claim that it is "Truth" is simply absurd.
Rather like claiming superluminal travel is possible because Darth Vader does it.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.