|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Tension of Faith | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
Aussie writes:
But what else do you expect. I don't have knowledge in the same sense that I know that the sun is out today. I make a point of saying that "I believe" or "I think" to make the point that I am not claiming absolute knowledge. It is the Christian faith. I'm really sorry, but your personal beliefs about points made of someone else's personal beliefs add no value at all to anything! You kept repeating lines such as "It is my belief..." "I think that..." "I understand this way..." "Understanding through certain lenses..." "Keys to understanding..." "Possibly there was..." I try to present my rationale as best I can for why I believe as I do but I can’t do better than that. In one sense it is no different than the atheist who believes there is nothing beyond the material. They can’t have absolute knowledge of that either, as the atheists that I have had discussions with are honest enough to point out, and yet it seems you expect me to be less honest.
Aussie writes: I truly get where you are coming from, but do you see from my perspective that this is deeply unsatisfying? You certainly have to have your understanding of Scripture, the problem is that every believer has their own understanding of Scripture. It reminds me of that verse, I don't remember where it it, "If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself for battle?"The "Sound" that we get from Scripture is so incredibly uncertain that it allows for hundreds of thousands of "personal understandings" that are mutually exclusive, with Christians running in every imaginable direction, yelling "Not true Christians" to the vast majority of the other believers. The uncertainty is to such a high degree that despite the account of Jesus' Resurrection, the only remaining observable Body of Christ has been torn into ten thousand tiny denominational pieces by the believers themselves. So what you personally believe is of no personal interest to me. But to a large degree that is what we should expect. I think that one thing that jar, Faith and myself can agree on is that what God ultimately wants of us is that we live as per my signature which is that we actively and humbly love, kindness and mercy, and that we act justly. Yes we all might differ as to how to apply that but the fundamental idea is consistent. That is the essence of the faith. Jesus said that we are to love God, which is where the humility comes in with the admission that it is God’s love that enables us to love, and that we are to be reflectors of that love to our neighbours and for that matter the whole world. That is the essence of the Christian faith, and of course it isn’t just Christians that believe that to be true, particularly the second part. The differences come in our theology. I doubt I could find another Christian in the world who has spent time considering Christian theology where there wouldn’t be areas of disagreement. I have no doubt that some things that I’m quite convinced about are wrong, but of course I don’t know which things they are. I have changed my mind on a number of issues over the years. Again, it is a belief or faith and not absolute knowledge.
Aussie writes: What I asked is, independent of you just making stuff up because it sounds good inside your own head, was there a specific methodology that you used to conclude that the seemingly straightforward and factual accounting of graves being opened, and long dead saints being resurrected out of them to be seen by many is simply metaphor, while the stone rolled away is literal?I'm really not trying to be a smart ass, but I spent my entire childhood and youth listening to people make shit up about the Bible, and I would genuinely love to see someone be brave enough to apply some rigor to their methodology. Maybe you? I have gone through this before but I’ll try again. I start out with two beliefs that I treat like absolutes. The first is that God is and was always good and the second is that God resurrected Jesus confirming Jesus’ life and message.With that is mind I regard the Bible as a library of books written by men who were inspired to preserve their cultures, beliefs, experiences etc. That does not mean that they always got it right. I don’t worship an inerrant Bible, but an inerrant Jesus, and the two just aren’t compatible. I’ve already given examples where that is evident. When I read through the Gospels it is clear that Jesus was very much a part of His 1st century Jewish culture. He obviously had tremendous knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures, (in all likelihood had them memorized), as He so often references them in His teaching. This is important when it comes to understanding the theology. For example, Jesus often refers to Himself as The Son of Man. Why does He do that? If we look at the book of Daniel Chap 7 we can get a very good idea of why He did that. So again to understand the theology of the NT we need the OT. However, it is a symbiotic relationship. In order to form a theology around the OT we need to do it through the lens of what Jesus taught and how He lived. As I said earlier, when we read about Yahweh commanding genocide and public stoning we can understand that it is an act of evil that is contrary to His will by looking at Jesus and His command that we are to love our enemy.Hopefully this answers your questions. I appreciate the way they were asked BTW. He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
ringo writes:
So nothing about Jesus at all. Jesus' life confirms that passage. It is one verse from the Bible. I'm afraid I don't get your point.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
ringo writes:
There are a lot of views out there about the nature of God and what He wants of us.
Why does it need confirmation?ringo writes: What do you mean by require. Required for what?
The point is right in your own signature: God doesn't require you to believe in Jesus.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
ringo writes: It's your signature. You tell me. If your own signature says that Jesus isn't required, why do you claim He is? My signature just tells us what God wants of us. I agree that belief in Jesus isn't necessary for that, although I do believe that it sure helps. Is that your point?He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
ringo writes: You have a habit of treating your beliefs as fact - e.g. your distinction between resurrection and resurrection. It's like pulling teeth trying to get you to admit something is just your belief. It's hard to win around here. In post 422 Aussie says this:
Aussie writes:
To which I replied in 427:
I'm really sorry, but your personal beliefs about points made of someone else's personal beliefs add no value at all to anything! You kept repeating lines such as "It is my belief..." "I think that..." "I understand this way..." "Understanding through certain lenses..." "Keys to understanding..." "Possibly there was..."GDR writes: But what else do you expect. I don't have knowledge in the same sense that I know that the sun is out today. I make a point of saying that "I believe" or "I think" to make the point that I am not claiming absolute knowledge. It is the Christian faith. I try to present my rationale as best I can for why I believe as I do but I can’t do better than that. In one sense it is no different than the atheist who believes there is nothing beyond the material. They can’t have absolute knowledge of that either, as the atheists that I have had discussions with are honest enough to point out, and yet it seems you expect me to be less honest. As far as the debate about the use of resurrection it is really clear in the Bible that what happened to Jesus was quite distinct from what happened to Lazarus and I think you said that you agreed with that. My signature is simply a quote from the Bible. It isn't me making an absolute statement.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
ringo writes:
I simply assumed you were trying to make the same point that Aussie was here.
You insisted that Lazarus was not resurrected. I agreed that there were differences between his resurrection and Jesus' - but a resurrection is still a resurrection.Aussie writes: o purely in terms of story telling, Lazarus seems like an even more dramatic resurrection. I guess that wasn't your point so we are in agreement.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Tangle writes:
Essentially I agree. The only point I’d make is that I don’t see how you can make the statement that atheists don’t believe that there is even a theoretical chance that Christ rose from the dead. However I’ll let you speak for the atheists. I think you need to be clear about what atheists are saying.There's no equivalence in an atheist saying that they can't prove that god doesn't exist, or that there's nothing that isn't simply natural - that's a simple statement of objective fact - and you believing in a risen Christ. No atheist would agree that there was even a theoretical chance that Christ rose from the dead. Nope, that for you to prove. You have an active belief in something, atheists just don't. Yes, it is by faith that I believe that the NT writers were correct when they wrote that Jesus rose from the dead. I also agree that it is an add on to the argument between basic theism or even deism and materialism or atheism. It is largely what differentiates Christianity from other theistic religions.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
Faith writes:
OK Faith. Just which part are you going to choose here. This is from 2nd Samuel 24. Yahweh is mad at the Israelites and tells David to take a census as we can see.
There is no value to a Bible that is not inerrant. "All scripture is God-breathed" is enough evidence for me. And God has the power to do it. If I had to listen to preachers picking and choosing the way you do I would never be a Christian at all. You accuse me of worshiping the Bible which is totally false, but what you do by picking and choosing is put your own fallen mind in the place of God.quote:Now then we go to the next verse and David is conscience-stricken for having done what Yahweh told him to do and asks for forgiveness. quote:Now it gets stranger because even though Yahweh told David to take this census He punishes the Jews by bringing a plague and killing 70,000 of them. quote:To sum this up then we have Yahweh telling David to take a census, David complies but then feels guilty about doing what Yahweh told him to do and asks forgiveness. An unforgiving Yahweh though doesn’t even take it out on David but causes 70,000 of his chosen people to die. You would have us believe that the writer of 2nd Samuel got this exactly correct. Now however it gets more interesting because we go to 1st Chronicles and this is what the writer of that book tells us.quote: So now this writer is saying not that it was the Lord, as claimed in 1st Samuel, but that it is Satan and then goes on to tell how Yahweh killed 70,000 of the Israelites. Firstly then why is God slaughtering His chosen people for what David did? Does this sound remotely like God as we see Him embodied by Jesus? Secondly was it the writer of 2nd Samuel who says it was the Lord who told David to take the census, or did the writer of 1st Chronicles get it right when he says it was Satan? They can't both be right.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
Faith writes:
Thanks for providing an answer even if I do think you are making a serious error in how God communicates to us through the Scriptures. I just reiterate, that just because God inspired people to write their stories does not make them inerrant. As I've said before they are inspired but not dictated. GDR, the first rule of Bible understanding is to assume if it seems to be contradictory the fault is your own. I'm serious. If you are unable to resolve it you just have to leave it for some future time when you may be able to. That's the only reasonable way one could possibly treat a communication understood to be God's own inspired Word.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
Faith writes:
The question isn't whether He can or not. The question is did He or not, and it is evident that when you read what I quoted earlier that He didn't. You don't think He can guide the exact message He wants written? You don't think He has the power to protect it and guarantee it?He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Paboss writes: It’s not a matter of accepting or rejecting what you call evidence from John’s testimony; is that it is not really evidence. Extraordinary claims written by someone do not count as evidence; if it were so, you would need to believe the claims made in the Koran, the Book of Mormon and thousands of other extraordinary claims people have made through time. However you accept the testimony from the Bible while rejecting the other different testimonies from other religions. There are several authors in the NT who make claims of the resurrection of Jesus. Yes, that is an extraordinary claim but that does not mean that it isn't evidence. We can also look at the fact that the accounts are not what we would expect from a first century Jew. Jesus isn't glowing like a star. Crucifixion isn't just a method of tortuously killing people, but is meant to absolutely dehumanize and humiliate people. Whoever was crucified would be naked on the cross with people throwing taunts and even objects at them. A Roman citizen could not be crucified. The idea of a crucified messiah was not what any Jew would want to worship. That is why Paul has to write that he is not ashamed to preach a crucified messiah. It is not correct to say that there isn't evidence. We are free to reject that evidence or believe some of it or all of it.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
Percy writes: It does mean it isn't evidence if you want any rigor in what you believe to be true about reality. Just because someone told a story doesn't magically transform it into credible evidence of the story's events. Across all the stories of the Bible, which is more fantastical, the Bible or Harry Potter. If you were looking at these two books from the distant future when both their origins are lost in time, why would you consider either one of them to contain any evidence? Obviously both are full of impossible events and are just fiction. That is not a reasonable comparison. We know that Harry Potter was written as a piece of fiction. Nobody after reading it has ever suggested that the story is anything but fiction. The Bible, and specifically the Gospels were written to inform people of what the writers wanted to be taken as historical. It is obviously not meant to be taken as fiction. As I said we can conclude that they got it wrong, or intentionally misled people, (without any discernible motivation for doing so), but it is obvious for numerous reasons that they intended the stories to be believed, and many people of that era, and to this day, believe that they got it right. There is no justification at all for comparing Harry Potter with the Bible.
Percy writes: One fits the style of fiction known as fantasy, while the other fits the style of fiction known as religion. This statement simply shows a view point that is anything but objective. It appears that you start off with the belief that all religion at the outset is fiction.
Percy writes: You're fond of expressing these sentiments, as if to say, "Just consider the unlikelihood of it all, it must be true," as if inconsistency and unbelievability were an indicator of credibility rather than of bad fiction. I am not saying that it must be true, but only that it is a reasonable conclusion.
Percy writes: The mere writing of words is not synonymous with the production of evidence. If I were to write, "The sorcerer disappeared into thin air," that is not evidence that sorcerers can disappear into thin air, or that sorcerers exist. We have faith that many historical documents represent an accurate account of events without further evidence. If you write that the sorcerer disappeared into thin air and made it obvious that you meant it to be taken literally, then it is evidence which we can either accept, reject or even be agnostic about. In the case of the Gospels it isn't just one person making these claims but numerous people from multiple sources. Much of it being written while there were still eye witnesses.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Modulous writes: 'We' don't. We tend to suppose the mundane documents are more reliable than the fantastic - but we definitely don't have faith that they are accurate without further evidence. So if we had a document that suggested wine was purchased by the house of Caligula - we can believe that. It is consistent with other evidence (people bought wine, the Julio-Claudian family was wealthy, people recorded transactions....). If we found a document that claimed Caligula was the God, the Father (Deus Pater - Jupiter) - we'd probably not have faith in that document's accuracy. Sure, but that does not have anything to say about whether or not the fantastic is historical or not. It is only saying that the mundane is easier to believe.
Modulous writes: 4 people. And in fact, we know there were many others. They differ in important facts to the point of contradiction. 3 of them are clearly drawing from the same source material (or two of them are drawing from the third). The Gospels are clearly biased - written by those who are trying to persuade, not just report. Actually I disagree. The Gospels do not paint the disciples in a positive way, and they present the people who have the influence and the power to have them killed, very negatively. They discredit much of what was important to the Jews in their Scriptures. In the 1st chapter of Luke he says that what he has written is a collection of the accounts of the eye witnesses and others who had contact with the eye witnesses.
quote: Certainly there are points of contradictions as we would expect to see in any such account. Look at the variations we get in the witnesses of a car accident. However just as they all agree that an accident actually happened, all of those involved in writing the Gospels, and for that matter the Epistles, agree that the resurrection was historical.
Modulous writes: Irrelevant. It wasn't like mass production happened, there is no reason to suppose that the texts were written anywhere near where the supposed witnesses lived. Most of the witnesses are unlikely to be able to read Greek. There is no evidence that there was anything *to* witness - and the text is vague enough about time and location to mean nobody could say 'I was there at that time and that didn't happen' - and even if they did - who would record that, and copy that recording over and over again? Also - of the events that are described which we would expect large numbers of witnesses to be able to verify - they don't. No census where people returned to where they born is recorded, no traditional public pardoning of criminals at Passover, no dead bodies walking around, no record of a tumult at the temple. The maji/wisemen's records didn't survive. Nothing from Herod or Pilate (and one wonders who witnessed these conversations and spoke of them later?) Sure but would you really expect an account from Herod or Pilate to include something about Jesus, and to the best of my knowledge we have nothing written by them about anything. About the only account we have from that era is Josephus who mentions Jesus a couple of times but that tells us nothing either. Josephus was very political and for the greatest part of his career a Roman sympathizer, and when he wast that he was with a Jewish crowd who wouldn't have looked favourably on the Christians. He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Paboss writes: It makes no difference how many people wrote accounts about something and how many people believe in those accounts; it does not make the writings evidence. I’ll try to show you what evidence looks like, taking examples from the Bible. As far as I can tell, the stories I am going to refer to are fictional, but I’ll go with them for the sake of the discussion. When Jesus resurrected and appeared to the disciples for the first time, Thomas was not there. When the other disciples told him about it, he did not believe. This is because the testimonies of around 10 people, even as reliable as they could have been for Thomas were still not evidence. He demanded evidence; he demanded to see Jesus by himself, to touch him and to touch his wounds. Only when he looked at the evidence he could believe. Despite Jesus praising those who believe without seeing (which is, those who believe without evidence, those who believe by faith, like you two do) he had no problem providing evidence when demanded. Second case is Paul, he was set in destroying all Christians. For him to change his mind and believe, it was necessary for Jesus to appear in person and talk to Paul (the book of Acts presents two contradictory versions of this but there is no need to go into that at this stage). Thomas and Paul required evidence to believe and Jesus had no problem to provide it (this is of course, according to the story). What they could see was good evidence for them; but for us to read about those stories is not evidence. Can you see the difference between proper evidence and what you call evidence? Of course it is evidence. Sure, what Thomas and Paul experienced was stronger evidence but that doesn't negate the fact that it is evidence. Is it conclusive? No. It isn't a case of proper evidence as opposed to not being evidence at all. It is strictly comparing weaker evidence to stronger evidence.
Paboss writes: IMHO it is both.He is using a metaphor to explain what the historical event meant to them in language that 1st century Jews would understand. Was he attempting to understand the meaning of Jesus’s resurrection or attempting to report a historical event?He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Percy writes: I'm frankly surprised that you share Faith's belief that faith requires evidence. I know I've already said this too many times, but faith doesn't require evidence. Requiring evidence is the opposite of faith. If you believe it because you think you have evidence, your belief has nothing to do with faith. Im on vacation and I dont want to spend a lot of time on this so I just want to respond to this. I have not claimed that faith requires evidence. Faith does not require evidence. My claim is that there is evidence in the fact that the NT exists. That is evidence which can be accepted or rejected. We can discuss the strength of that as evidence, and on that we will obviously disagree, but the fact remains that it is evidence.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024