Recommended Posts
jakee 1,593
QuoteNot necessarily at all.QuoteQuoteQuoteScience is nothing but a series of corrected mistakes.
Ya, which is passed off as truth and imposed on evreyone else's beliefs as if it's some type of supreme authority...
I think the point you're missing is that the result of a corrected mistake is something which is correct.
Yes necessarily. Unless your definition of 'corrected' is 'not necessarily corrected'.
jakee 1,593
QuoteNow, back to science, everything you wrote applies to the science people, too. Do you agree with that?
Semi nomadic agrarians in the bronze age?
Coreece 190
QuoteThese two statements are no different than what could be used to validate the legitimacy of any other religion. It doesn't help in any way to establish the Christian God as the right God. Which is my point.
I simply answering your question of why doesn't God perform some miracles like he used to in the Bible. I gave you an explanation and you didn't like...big surprise.
Your point, like always, is that God doesn't do things the way you want him to, therefore he is wrong and doesn't exist.
He said I AM WHO I AM, not I am whatever you want me to be....
Quoteif the Christian God existed, why would he be content with the belief of him having equal evidence as the evidence for any other religion. Surely if saving souls was important to him he would see that Christianity looks just like every other religion and believers of other faiths have the same 'recorded miracles' as Christianity has, and think "Hey, let me show them who the real God is."
Pffft...reminds me of this:
And those who passed by spoke reproachfully and abusively and jeered at Him, wagging their heads,
And they said.....If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross.
In the same way the chief priests, with the scribes and elders, made sport of Him, saying, He rescued others from death; Himself He cannot rescue from death. He is the King of Israel? Let Him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in and acknowledge and cleave to Him.
Pesonally I wouldn't expect God to entertain and give way to such arrogance.
Coreece 190
QuoteSeriously? They wrote down what they saw? Semi-nomadic agrarians in the Bronze Age?
Embellish much? Lately it seems as though you are having difficulty making a point without having to exaggerate.
First, It's clear from the quotes I provided that I was referring to the NT.
Second, of the 66 books in the Bible, only 8 were written in the last couple hundred years of the late bronze age.
Many people like to cast doubt on scripture by attacking the reliabilty of the early writers and continually pointing out some of the more equivocal ideas that are only compised in a small portion of scripture. They avoid the more practical ideas like those found in Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. Much of the wisdom found in those books most certainly can be applied today and demonstrates that civilization back then wasn't as irrelevent as some would like it to be.
For the most part, human nature hasn't changed much in the last several thousand years...
QuoteWhat was their level of literacy? Of education? Of skills at observing, understanding and accurately reporting facts.... and all in the first person?
It varries...
Matthew was a tax collector, probably not the most honest person prior to his conversion, but he was a first person witness.
Mark was not an eye witness but he did accompany Peter through his ministry as his interpreter. The book is considered to be the memoirs of Peter.
Luke was not an eye witness but he was a physician who accompanied Paul durring his travels. He's believed to be the author of the book of acts and the gospel of luke. (I tend to be more partial to the content and literary style of this gospel.)
John was a fisherman and eyewitness to Christ's earthly ministry. Many people consider fishermen to be liars...
Peter was an overzealous loud mouth and like most apostles didn't really understand the objective of Jesus' ministry. It wasn't until he matured that he had anything beneficial to say. His writings are probably the most underrated and ignored books of the NT because of the tendancy to cause division. Basically, if you study Peter's writings you'll be able to spot a false teacher comming a mile away. False teachers running churches don't like this.
Paul was a highly respect Pharisee...it's clear from his writings that he was no dummy. It's hard to say what christianity would be today without his insight and determination.
None of this of course really matters once the spiritual truths drawn from scripture are applied and transforms one's life.
Quotesocieties indoctrinate children virtually from birth; indoctrination is passed down through the generations as part of the social norms and imperatives;and once ingrained, that's very difficult to shake in the face of social pressure and reinforcement
I just don't buy it. It seems to me most people don't really understand the faith when they're young. As they grow into their teens and early twenties it tends to be virtually non-existent. they don't necessarilly consider themselves atheists, but thier beliefs just don't serve any practical relevence...out of sight out of mind.
I think many atheists can relate to that...they grew up in religious families but the the lack of practice in their late adolescence through early adulthood evolved into atheism...
It isn't until one matures and finds a reason to turn back and give it another shot that they can begin to see if they missed something and then apply scripture through faith to experience some type of life changing result and gain understanding.
Quote- including, most powerfully, the very real threat of being ostracized
I don't buy that either. You can go out in public to the gocery store, library, the club, work, wherever and chances are that you're not gonna be hearing about some long drawn out discussion about God. It's hardly thrown into peoples' faces as much as they would like to claim. One could probably go their whole life without ever having to disclose their personal religious beliefs. I dare you to go out in public and start talking about judgement/atonement and see how many friends you make...
As is science. This whole discussion has become an argument in semantics. How we label our observations, in our limited vocabulary, doesn't change the ultimate nature of those observations.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites