|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 60 (9208 total) |
| |
The Rutificador chile | |
Total: 919,510 Year: 6,767/9,624 Month: 107/238 Week: 24/83 Day: 3/4 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A question for believers - why the Bible? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
asciikerr Inactive Member |
Why do you, personally, believe that the Bible is divinely inspired? (not necessarily as compared to any other religious text - even simply on its own, what makes you believe that the Bible was God's form of teaching us what we needed to know about Him?) This heads into the argument of "What is Truth?" as Pilate once asked. Sure you may be able to find "some" truths in other books, but a few truths doesn't make them entirely true in itself. The Bible covers our beginning, why things are, how to live life more abundantly, sound Biblical solutions for real-world situations & finding deliverance through God's Plan for your life. So from Genesis to Revelation, man's redemption and everything in between is used by us "believers" in order to live a life that brings glory to God Almighty. The treasure of practical solutions based solely on God's Word.Cheers!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gilgamesh Inactive Member |
asciikerr wrote:
This heads into the argument of "What is Truth?" as Pilate once asked. Sure you may be able to find "some" truths in other books, but a few truths doesn't make them entirely true in itself. The Bible covers our beginning, why things are, how to live life more abundantly, sound Biblical solutions for real-world situations & finding deliverance through God's Plan for your life. So from Genesis to Revelation, man's redemption and everything in between is used by us "believers" in order to live a life that brings glory to God Almighty. Above all else, it contains God's timeless & unchangeable Truth in all things; man's sin nature, the fallen world, God's love for us, heaven/hell, redemption etc., The treasure of practical solutions based solely on God's Word.
Most Christians are the last people you would want to talk to about "truth". They live in a delusion and negligently or deliberately propagate mistruths, that they themselves could dispell if they bothered to educate themselves. You'll find most geniune attempts at truths in science books which attempt to use the most successful and tested knowledge gathering technique ever known to man. You'll find attempts at philosophical truths in religious texts like the Bible, spread amongst demonstratble falsities like world wide floods, dragons, witches and people returning from the dead. The Bible includes one of the many mythical creation stories, and not a particularly impressive one, and one that has to be taken on faith because it has no support in science. It's description of why things are has no explantory value and restrained the advance of science and modern society for the hundreds of years known as the Dark Ages. It contains an oppressive and impossible to apply description of how to live life, that in many cases of application leads to existences of unjustified guilt, intellectual bankruptcy, and false and unfulfilled hopes. It also perscribes a method of intolerance towards others that has lead to countless wars, death and agony of humans throughout the history of the Christian church. The Bible includes a plethora of absurd and inapplicable solutions for real world situations, most of which are understandably horribly obsolete. It also includes a formulae for churches to use to exploit your hard earned wealth, time and labor, which despite optimistic claims, ends in the inevitable reality of the same cold dark grave for theist and atheist alike. From the demonstrably false myth of Genesis, with it's crazy story of a petty God that puts a man to a test he knows he will fail and then condemns his innocent offspring for all eternity, to the ravings of Revelation desbribing an end-time that Christians have been waiting for for two thousands years, and will never come (and use as an excuse to disregard larger environmental and ethical issues). The empty promise of redemption from something we haven't done, for a reward that we will never get, and everything else in between is by the Christian church to exploit it's followers and satiate their inability to accept reality. Above all, it contains a inconsistent and changing account of reality and morality, and a continuingly obsolete understanding of the universe and our place in it. An adult fairy tale, but with often tragic real world consequences for the mental, physical and financial health of those who fall for it. A lengthy, problematic, often horrifying and only marginally in intriguing read that would be of mild amusement if it hadn't played such a terrible role in human history; the Bible can be thrown on the heap of alike ancient mythology. Making broad, sweeping generalisations is fun.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
asciikerr Inactive Member |
It contains an oppressive and impossible to apply description of how to live life, that in many cases of application leads to existences of unjustified guilt, intellectual bankruptcy, and false and unfulfilled hopes. Please do indulge me in these accounts..
It also perscribes a method of intolerance towards others that has lead to countless wars, death and agony of humans throughout the history of the Christian church. Did Jesus ever command these countless of wars? Try reading for yourself (Matt 5:44-45).
The Bible includes a plethora of absurd and inapplicable solutions for real world situations, most of which are understandably horribly obsolete. Examples? I'm open for debate. It also includes a formulae for churches to use to exploit your hard earned wealth, time and labor, which despite optimistic claims, ends in the inevitable reality of the same cold dark grave for theist and atheist alike. Sure, many churches and T.V. Evangelists do this, but do they really teach "Sound Doctrine?" Not likely, and unfortunately for the believer who is unable to read their Bible for whatever reason, they fall into this scheme. Ultimately, its about having victory over the grave...its all about the resurrection my friend. Making broad, sweeping generalisations is fun. Maybe fun, but it sure doesn't hold any water...
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gilgamesh Inactive Member |
Hi asciikerr,
Please, pick a topic that you feel the Bible doesn't have any answers for and lets run with it..lets test this "plethora of absurd and inapplicable solutions for real world situations" I'd like a hand at it myself, I'm sure we can both learn from this. I am up for this debate, but you have caught me at the 11th hour. It's 4.45pm Queensland, Australia, Christmyth eve. I knock off work in 15 minutes and commence a short, but blissful and well earned vacation in Australia's tropical haven. I'll give you a tit-bit to demolish in my abscence, and have a look where you are at when I return in five days. Umm, let's see, flipping through the pages, so much silliness: let's try Deuteronomy: 23:1 You can't go to church if your tecticles are damaged or your penis cut off. Yea that makes sense. 22:5 Women can't wear men's clothing. Hmm, sound fashion advice for today. 25:5-10 If a man dies without having a child, his brother should snog his wife. if he refuses she should loosen his shoe and spit on him. Something in that for everyone. Gotta run. Happy Pagan holidays!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
asciikerr Inactive Member |
I'll give you a tit-bit to demolish in my abscence, and have a look where you are at when I return in five days. Umm, let's see, flipping through the pages, so much silliness: let's try Deuteronomy: Glad to see your eager to begin, however...explaining why they did this, that or the other during ancient times isn't going to help the discussion. The way this should work is by the example you gave: "plethora of absurd and inapplicable solutions for real world situations" Example: You provide a real-world situation: Wife cheated & seeks forgiveness.I use the Bible for a practical solution: Forgive Her...etc. You get the idea... Acts 17:11 "These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so."
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18652 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.2 |
Peter Kreeft, Ph.D., is a professor of philosophy at Boston College. He is a regular contributor to several Christian publications, is in wide demand as a speaker at conferences, and is the author of over 40 books including:
Handbook of Christian Apologetics Christianity for Modern Pagans Fundamentals of the Faith. On his website, he has several arguments for proving Gods existance. Peter Kreeft - Featured Writings shows the links to his logic. Can You Prove God Exists? Before we answer this question, we must distinguish five questions that are often confused. First, there is the question of whether something exists or not. A thing can exist whether we know it or not.Second, there is the question of whether we know it exists. (To answer this question affirmatively is to presuppose that the first question is answered affirmatively, of course; though a thing can exist without our knowing it, we cannot know it exists unless it exists.) Third, there is the question of whether we have a reason for our knowledge. We can know some things without being able to lead others to that knowledge by reasons. Many Christians think God's existence is like that. Fourth, there is the question of whether this reason, if it exists, amounts to a proof. Most reasons do not. Most of the reasons we give for what we believe amount to probabilities, not proofs. For instance, the building you sit in may collapse in one minute, but the reliability of the contractor and the construction materials is a good reason for thinking that very improbable. Fifth, if there is a proof, is it a scientific proof, a proof by the scientific method, i.e., by experiment, observation, and measurement? Philosophical proofs can be good proofs, but they do not have to be scientific proofs. I believe we can answer yes to the first four of these questions about the existence of God but not to the fifth. God exists, we can know that, we can give reasons, and those reasons amount to proof, but not scientific proof, except in an unusually broad sense. There are many arguments for God's existence, but most of them have the same logical structure, which is the basic structure of any deductive argument. First, there is a major premise, or general principle. Then, a minor premise states some particular data in our experience that come under that principle. Finally, the conclusion follows from applying the general principle to the particular case. In each case the conclusion is that God exists, but the premises of the different arguments are different. The arguments are like roads, from different starting points, all aiming at the same goal of God. In subsequent essays we will explore the arguments from cause and effect, from conscience, from history, and from Pascal's Wager. The next essay explores the Argument from Design. This message has been edited by Phatboy, 12-24-2004 02:46 AM
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9012 From: Canada Joined: |
It doesn't appear to be.
It is also linked to in a PNT that hasn't been approved yet. And they are abysmally simple minded and silly "proofs" as well. Play a game and see if you can spot the logical flaws. This message has been edited by NosyNed, 12-24-2004 02:55 AM
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 5218 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
I read some of the Peter Kreeft material and it is truly abysmal. The guy just regurgitates all the arguments that have been trashed a thousand times and he is probably aware that these arguments will appear amazing to a large audience. He will be making a tidy little profit out of many gullible people.
I honestly cannot believe that he is teaching at a college, his grasp of philosophy is painful. Look at this piece of crap: If you believe in God only as a bet, that is certainly not a deep, mature, or adequate faith. But it is something, it is a start, it is enough to dam the tide of atheism. What a idiot. He splutters on about Pascal's Wager, acknowlegdes that it has been trashed by most philosophers, but he still goes on about how wonderful it is. Then he thinks that believing in God as a sort of insurance policy is a good place to start! Then his comment about atheism is insulting to a great many people. How did this guy ever get a job in education? It must have something to do with his employers being a Christian College. But, on topic now, I think most people that follow the Bible do so because they have been suffocated with its contents as they grew up, and they find it difficult to let go of what has been crammed down their throat. I also think that there is a different category here. There are those who are so gullible that they get sucked in by the people who make the Bible into a gimmick. I blame the Internet, lack of education, and laziness. Most of us could probably list believers' arguments for why they believe in the Bible, prophecy, historically accurate, or internal harmony, but all these gimmicks disappear with the slightest bit of objective research. The Internet has helped to spread a great many arguments that make the Bible look as if it simply has to be the Word of God, nothing else makes sense. But, it is the same old arguments that have been trashed again and again. I also have to question the level of education of many Christians who find things like Peter Kreeft's website a font of amazing proofs for God. Why do they soak up so much of this crap when they are free thinking adults? This brings me to the last point, laziness. I think that many of the Christians who link to crappy websites like Kreeft's are simply too lazy to go to a library and look at materials for themselves. They are too lazy to sign up for some further education courses that would help them understand subjects a lot better. Of course, it is entirely up to the individual what they believe and why they believe it, but they should be aware that just because an argument looks good to them it does not follow that it is a good argument. Brian.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3716 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:I was born and raised a Christian. The simplist answer is: That is what I was taught. As an adult, once I started to truly read and study the Bible as a whole (not bits and pieces), I started to believe differently. While I'm sure the authors were inspired, as writers usually are, I don't believe that their motives were altruistic. It is a religious text, written for the time of the authors to promote their religion and IMO it should be understood from that perspective. A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18652 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.2 |
A Question For Believers
Our original topic post was:morte writes: Additionally, the topic is addressed to "believers" and in order to approach the topic from that perspective, I must be free to quote other "believers" even if they are branded as simplistic and absurd by you logical freethinkers. Why do you, personally, believe that the Bible is divinely inspired? (not necessarily as compared to any other religious text - even simply on its own, what makes you believe that the Bible was God's form of teaching us what we needed to know about Him?)If you dismiss Kreeft, BTW, what do you think of Geisler?http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~lin/files/absolute.html So why do I believe that the Bible is divinely inspired? In order to answer this, I ask myself what divine inspiration is? Is it possible? Well, it has happened to me, so how can I dismiss it? My status as a believer was initially fostered by what I perceived as a divine impartation. The "born again" experience, if you will. brian writes: OK. I can see some of what you are insinuating, but how can you "trash" someones experience? What about "internal harmony"? What do you tell the believers? Tell them they were brainwashed and produce evidence of how hypnosis works? Produce testimonies of ex-christians who finally woke up and found their brain?( and their ego!) Assume that once they see facts, they will dismiss their feelings and experiences? I read some of the Peter Kreeft material and it is truly abysmal. The guy just regurgitates all the arguments that have been trashed a thousand times... I will agree that much of organized religion is a self serving sham. This is human nature. Make a buck. Make a buck "disproving" the Bible, perhaps? Make a name for oneself? So how is it that some can view the Bible as a scattered early collection of writings by authors with an ulterior motive while others find a cohesiveness of meaning within this book? It all depends upon a persons worldview. A worldview is in essence a body of beliefs about life's most basic questions by which a person views or interprets the world. If your worldview is always filtered through the scientific method, for example, you may feel as if you never will get fooled. You will interpret virtually everything that you read, see, or come in contact with from a detached and unbiased position. Everything, that is, except yourself. How you think. What YOUR motives are. What you want to believe, deep down below the detachment.
brian writes: Ok, Brian. You have a theology degree. What do you believe about the concept of "original sin"? Some theologians are believers. They believe that God is real. They believe that His Spirit is alive and that they are not He. Other theologians are academic philosophers. They study and compare religious beliefs from an objective and a detached view. Most of us could probably list believers' arguments for why they believe in the Bible, prophecy, historically accurate, or internal harmony, but all these gimmicks disappear with the slightest bit of objective research. We need you objective guys to keep from hysteria, but we also must acknowledge that the origin of ones basic belief is also important. If you think that truth will be found through education, you MAY be right and you MAY be wrong. From the worldview of a believer, humanity at its very core does not even want to acknowledge the truth of a Creator. If we take the Bible totally out of the equation, how would a Christian form a worldview except based on their own internal feelings? How COULD a Christian form a worldview from a detached factual mode and still be a Christian by definition? Some would argue that we MUST trust our own internal conscience because only through that plus basic logic can we avoid deception. A wise point, although we are still faced with our belief on humanity as ultimately benevolant and good or humanity as flawed without a personal committment, surrender, and acknowledgement of a personal and loving God. A theologian without a belief in God is nothing more than a philosopher of religious human ideas. If you believe that this is all that is real, than you are not a believer. Kreeft writes: Even Christ did not convince everyone by his miracles. He could have remained on earth, offered to walk into any scientific laboratory of the twentieth century, and invited scientists to perform experiments on him. He could have come down from the Cross, and then the doubters would have believed. But he did not. Even the Resurrection was kept semiprivate. The New Testament speaks of five hundred who saw him. Why did he not reveal himself to all? And so, if we do not believe in this Bible, all that we have to go on is our belief in our perception. Our belief in our internal locus of control. I think that we all share this belief. Some of us believe, ultimately, that internal wisdom is the source of all knowledge. Others believe in God. I can't explain or prove the difference between these two conclusions. Ultimately, I believe that He can. This message has been edited by Phatboy, 12-26-2004 03:41 AM
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shaz Inactive Member |
Morte writes: Why do you, personally, believe that the Bible is divinely inspired? My answer to this is very short and simple, and it is because, I choose to believe.As for the topic of this thread, 'why the bible?'. For me it is simply a case of, why not! Shaz
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1603 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
I have a relatively simple question for all of the Christians on the site (whether or not you believe the Bible is inerrant/meant to be taken literally): Why do you, personally, believe that the Bible is divinely inspired? i don't. i believe the bible to be 100% the work of man, give or take a few percent because you never really know. yes, i am a christian.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1603 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
keep in mind that bible is not ONE book but many:
It's not a Romance Novel song of songs/solomon IS romantic poetry.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 5218 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi Phat,
In order to answer this, I ask myself what divine inspiration is? Is it possible? Well, it has happened to me, so how can I dismiss it? You have been divinely inspired to do what?
My status as a believer was initially fostered by what I perceived as a divine impartation. The "born again" experience, if you will. Which could be simply a psychological phenomenon. I mean, people from every faith will tell you the same thing, their experience is so real that it MUST be true. You believing that you have had a religious experience does not make that experience a reflection of reality. Did you go to a doctor and tell him about your experience?
OK. I can see some of what you are insinuating, but how can you "trash" someones experience? Quite easily. The same way that born again Christians trash other peoples’ experiences of their God. Do you think that Hindus can speak to Brahma?
What about "internal harmony"? What internal harmony? What little harmony there is can easily be explained by the fact that the Bible has been edited by various different ‘schools’ and many conflicts have been removed. But, there are still many contradictions and historical inaccuracies in the text.
What do you tell the believers? Fortunately, in the UK, there only appears to be a tiny minority who are of this gimmicky Bible inerrancy nonsense. But, I would tell believers to think for themselves and to avoid websites that use juvenile arguments like Kreeft, and Giesler who only reinforce what most atheists believe, that the born again Xian will grasp at any straw to support their faith. It is idiotic, and the Bible even insists that faith is superior to hard facts.
Tell them they were brainwashed and produce evidence of how hypnosis works? That’s one way. But, I would prefer education, actually teach them why the Bible was produced, how it was produced and outline some of the difficulties. Education is the key, not reading these silly websites about moon dust and NASA computers finding Joshua’s long day.
Assume that once they see facts, they will dismiss their feelings and experiences? This would depend on the individual, as to some people it would not matter how many errors you showed them in the Bible they would still be unable to acknowledge it.
I will agree that much of organized religion is a self serving sham. This is human nature. Make a buck. Make a buck "disproving" the Bible, perhaps? You will find that there are many more people who make a fortune out of gullible Xians than make money out of ‘disproving’ the Bible. The scholars who people think are out to disprove the Bible are normally scholars who write for journals and write academic books, they really do not make that muck money. If you want to make money then write a pro-bible book and watch the money roll in. Check out how many copies that Josh MacDowell has sold of ETDV I and II, his work is utter trash yet he has made a fortune to of people who thinkhe knows what he is talking about. But scholars who *appear* to be disproving the Bible are actually trying to discover how and why the Bible was composed. They do not set out to disprove anything, they set out to try and discover the truth.
So how is it that some can view the Bible as a scattered early collection of writings by authors with an ulterior motive while others find a cohesiveness of meaning within this book? It is all to do with the approach. Like I said before, many people are brainwashed into thinking that the Bible is something that it isn’t, they find it hard to let go. Others are lazy and find it comfortable to sit back and blindly accept these tales. Others, who have a personal religious experience, need to justify their experience by showing other people that the source of their God’s history and deeds is perfect, thus keeping their ‘experience’ real. How someone can look at the books of, say Genesis and Exodus, and think that everything happened exactly as written is beyond me, I would need to put it down to some psychological phenomenon. If the Bible provides us with this wonderful access to God’s ideas, then why don’t we all see it?
Ok, Brian. You have a theology degree. What do you believe about the concept of "original sin"? Original sin is a concept thought up to explain why God is so hopeless. The Israelite intelligentsia had to explain why a perfect being can create such a mess of a world, it obviously cannot be His fault so they need an excuse for God. Sin is a cracking excuse, add a couple of lumps of free will and God is off the hook, He is not as useless as it appears, it is all OUR fault that God had to scrap his first attempt and start again.
We need you objective guys to keep from hysteria, Yes, but not all Xians think this way Phat, many believe that the objective guys are purely attacking the Bible, but we aren’t. Many atheists study the Bible because they believe that it is an amazing collection of ancient literature, or it contains some accurate history that contributes to our understanding of the past.
but we also must acknowledge that the origin of ones basic belief is also important. If you think that truth will be found through education, you MAY be right and you MAY be wrong. But these can be demonstrated to others, your personal experience is not something that anyone else can share with you, you cannot say ‘here Brian try this. What do you think?’
From the worldview of a believer, humanity at its very core does not even want to acknowledge the truth of a Creator. That’s exactly how the Church planned it. Think about it, how can a good and perfect God be responsible for all the evil in the world, all the bad things had to be someone else’s fault, inventing the idea of sin and hell was a masterstroke, it certainly controlled the masses of ignorant peasants for hundreds of years. However, the modern day world has many explanations for things that were considered miraculous thousands of years ago, and a great deal of the biblical events have been shown to be untrue. The bible is a great collection of literature (well the OT is, I find the NT probably the most boring collection of texts on the planet), but what bugs me is these halfwits who make the Bible into a gimmick, all it does is to make them and others look stupid. What does it matter of there wasn’t a worldwide flood or that Joseph was a complete work of fiction?
If we take the Bible totally out of the equation, how would a Christian form a worldview except based on their own internal feelings? You don’t have to take it out of the equation, you just need to realise that everything in it is not 100% literal and it wasn’t written to be. You have to realise that if Methuselah did not live until he was 969 years old then it doesn’t affect the Book at all, but we have all sorts of clowns coming up with crazy ideas to try and ‘prove’ things like this.
How COULD a Christian form a worldview from a detached factual mode and still be a Christian by definition? You can accept the core teachings of Christ and reject some things on a literal level. You can accept that Jesus died for your sins and his sacrifice gives you the opportunity to have eternal life with him in heaven, you can accept all this without performing mental contortions to try and prove something that cannot be proven. All these arguments for the existence of God are all doomed before they begin, and as far as I am concerned, every time someone links to sites such as Kreeft’s it just confirms my suspicions.
Some would argue that we MUST trust our own internal conscience because only through that plus basic logic can we avoid deception. That’s fine and well, but how do you demonstrate to others that your conscience is guiding you to the truth?
A wise point, although we are still faced with our belief on humanity as ultimately benevolent and good or humanity as flawed without a personal committment, surrender, and acknowledgement of a personal and loving God. But this argument doesn’t hold any water either. Many Xians argue that if there was no God then everyone would be running around murdering, raping, stealing and all manner of other atrocities. If this is the case then how do you explain the fact that many atheists are very moral people? I personally would never intentionally break the law or hurt a fellow human being, but I know many xians who are extremely cruel to other people, mainly in a verbal context of course.
A theologian without a belief in God is nothing more than a philosopher of religious human ideas. What is wrong with that though? What if, ultimately, theology is simply another branch of philosophy, wouldn’t you rather know the truth?
And so, if we do not believe in this Bible, all that we have to go on is our belief in our perception. Our belief in our internal locus of control. I think that we all share this belief. There is no problem with believing the Bible, but you have to realise that every single syllable in it has to be taken on faith. What I am getting at are these silly arguments that crop up all the time, do you seriously think that people like myself are going to think there is a God because someone found giant finger or that Jesus must be God because we know he wasn’t a liar? It is ludicrous. Christianity is a faith, you have to believe in it on faith. You are never going to ‘prove’ that Christianity is true.
Some of us believe, ultimately, that internal wisdom is the source of all knowledge. But then you expect us to believe that your internal wisdom is accurate when it suggests to us the complete opposite to what we can demonstrate? We can show where the Bible has been edited, we can show the ragged edges where the texts do not quite fit, and we can show where the historical inaccuracies are, but your internal wisdom is yours alone.
Others believe in God. I can't explain or prove the difference between these two conclusions. Ultimately, I believe that He can. Ultimately I believe that a personal religious experience is just that, personal. Why people try to justify it with arguments about the odds of one person ‘fulfilling’ 300 plus prophecies is nonsense. If you have experienced God, then good luck to you, but you really cannot complain when others have not had the same experience and come to different conclusions. The three reasons I gave were not meant to apply to every Xian, only to the ones who point to gimmicks in the Bible to try and argue that it HAS to be the word of God. If they love the Bible so much then maybe they should study it a bit more at a decent level and stop regurgitating crap they find on the Net. There are a lot of people making a lot of money out of arguments that have been shown to be childish so many times that it does get frustrating. Brian.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18652 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.2 |
Hi, Brian. Good response by the way. I suppose that I could fret and worry about you being a theologian who may well be more of a humanist than a believer, but if I trust my God as all powerful and all good, I should then trust that the matter is between you and He.
Brian writes: What do you make of the discussion between apologists such as R.C.Sproul and others who attempt to show the dangers of moral relativism vs truth as an absolute? IF there is one God, regardless of which religion or belief system He comes from, would it not make sense that the Spirit and truth of this God IS an absolute? Ultimately I believe that a personal religious experience is just that, personal.Brian writes: No, I suppose that it is a sacred right to make up ones mind for themselves. I DO agree with you that far too many immature Christians do not understand why hammering at an issue using other peoples quotes and research does become a bit annoying to those of us who would prefer to arrive at our own decisions. If you have experienced God, then good luck to you, but you really cannot complain when others have not had the same experience and come to different conclusions.Brian writes: And neither did Jesus. If He did rise from the dead and is in fact alive today, and IF this revelation of truth was grasped by some people, He is alive despite the ones who see no evidence to support the fact, however. I suppose that the best evidence for His divinity and Spirit is shining through those who claim to be believers. So since few believers have impressed you lately, I would suspect that there are truly few who HAVE been chosen.
You are never going to ‘prove’ that Christianity is true.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024