Existance Of Jesus (aka Christ) Core of Christianity

[adriantc 0]

[1] You're still begging the question: you have yet to show that He isn't doing anything, even in the least. You might be able to show that He's not doing anything according to "your" standards (though standards can wave), but it doesn't follow that He's not doing anything.

 

[2] It may have a lot of metaphoric parts, and even what is literal can be taken metaphorically (though frowned upon Biblically), but that doesn't mean all those statements you saw in that other topic have no literal bearing on reality and therefore should be considered fully (or any amount) metaphoric.

 

[3] Though it is perfectly logical to stop asking questions when you have all knowledge of the universe (and things beyond it), i don't recall any believer proclaiming, "I know everything." Even one of the early church fathers, St. Augustine, said that interpretations should change when new knowledge is discovered if they contradict each other. Note that he did not say that what is written should change. And if you're going to bring up how "ambiguous the Bible is" from this, do keep in mind that science does the same thing when new knowledge is found that contradicts a previous interpretation. After all, all evidence is interpreted.

 

[4] Genesis only mentions physical imperfections, not metaphysical ones. God created Adam and Eve pure and without sin, just like every other being that followed. All those metaphysical things came after the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil. But why would i blame a rich person for trying? And if you're indirectly accusing God, again, you would be begging the question again.

 

[5] To answer your question on if the story is familiar, i thought you would conclude something else rather than some rock being at the right place at the right time. Personally it sounded it was along the lines of the paradoxical question, "Who (or what) created God?" Why did i think that? Because we were backtracing how things are affected by each other. To put it in a visual way: we <- environment <- universe <- ???.

 

Concerning your other question about the rock at the right place and right time: Yes, it is hard to believe in that, because how would a mere rock not only be able to split itself to cause other rocks into existence, melt itself, but also form an atmosphere around itself for life to even have a chance at survival?—that is, at least without divine intervention.

 

[6] Sure ignorant people are easier to influence, but you do realize you are begging the question again (though it started way back though i didn't say much about it) by claiming the church hated (scientific) knowledge, right? Just so that the burden of proof may weigh more on you so that you may see clearly my accusation, i'll give you a site that quotes St. Augustine, an early church father, on the exact thing you're talking about: http://www.pibburns.com/augustin.htm

 

[7] I too do not know why God caused existence into being, but i shall ask you (an objective) question: What book or site implanted the idea in you that God is impersonal? If no book or site, then how can you, a person who seems to be just like those in the "Unholy Trinity," trying to abolish faith (or religion itself) for the "sake of knowledge," convince yourself (through logical means) that God does not intervene even in the least?

 

[8] That basically says don't rely fully on what is seen but consider what is unseen. I already read that allegory, though; still find it interesting. And if you quoted that for proving or supporting ideas that you've been mentioning, then it is a bit counter-intuitive.

 

[9]Ah, but that follows for unbelievers as well. (I can't remember if i've seen that one before, though.)

 

[1]. That only proves what I keep saying. You God has a double standard. Whatever law, moral, etc. can be applied to us, it cannot be applied to Him. But then, if there is no standard for behavior, how do we know He is good if there is no good as standard for Him. In his point of view the Devil is just as good as God.

 

[2]. What I wanted to show is that the Bible does not state any general scientific facts. It doesn't say "Water boils at 100C!"; it may state it metaphorically so somebody looking to find that statement will eventually twist the meaning of a line or two and end up having "Water boils at 100C!". It doesn't mean the Bible is true or false it just means it was created specifically to be unclear. Starting from that point I said it was done so that people from whatever point in time can find it just as true as the day it was written. That doesn't mean it's not true, what it means is that we shouldn't look in it for any proof.

 

[3]. If a theory is proved correct it will never become incorrect. What will happen in time is that the now proven theory becomes part of a larger theory (more general) which may state things differently. Or the old theory may even be an exception of the new theory. But that doesn't make it incorrect. The scientists never change their mind. So what does change in a theory is it's generality. What scientists thought could be universal they could discover is only locally correct and they require a new "more" general theory.

What history shows is that, to the church, science is something of a forbidden territory. In my language the word science is derived from the verb "to know". Why did the church consider science so bad for so many centuries? It may make some of us think that whatever science has to discover it wouldn't help their cause? In other words, and it's the second time I ask you this, if the church is right and God exists and science can only prove that why would they forbid science for such a long time. If they were right science could only increase their power!

 

[4]. You mean blaming them for not trying! Because it is immoral to have such power (at least financially) and don't do anything to help those in need. And as much as you try to double standard God, that also applies to him. I find it troubling that you try to justify inactivity. Isn't the cornerstone of Christianity (and any other religion) to help your brother. What kind of example gives God? But of course He, in His great power and knowledge, in His infinite wisdom, is above us and his actions cannot be subject to our reasoning. Do you think your reasoning is good enough for those in Gaza and in Israel? Is the "Chosen People" not so well chosen. Is Allah just as passive as our God is when it comes to falling bombs?

 

Do you blame those people: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

 

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing!

[5]. Where you see miracle I see coincidence. It's that easy! If you didn't know about the Sun and the Earth you would think seasons are also a miracle. Given enough knowledge nothing is a miracle, it is just the sum of some factors. Everything, and I do mean everything, can be explained sooner or later. If you rather want to believe it is a miracle and not investigate it is just as I said... There is not much room for curiosity...

 

[6]. I don't know what you think, but the article on the Inquisition on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition) makes it pretty clear. You simply don't want to admit it... It is a well known fact that the church (at least before the 19th century) was totally against scientific knowledge making all those who knew something that contradicted them heretics. Not only that, but ending their careers sharply and in some cases even their life. How can you not admit that?

 

[9]. You are right. We are all believers in some form or another. But while I am ready to change my belief based on evidence, you are not ready (able) to do that. The evidence part is what separates all of us!

Edited January 6, 2009 by adriantc (see edit history)

[novic_1223 0]

i think that jesus is just an imaginary friend for grown ups and the devil is the person we blame all our problems on therfore making jesus someone who does in fact in my mind not exist.jesus was a story that was trying to show us how to be a better person but we have made it into a whole debate about it...just take out the main point of the story and leave the book alone(bible) live ur life and stop worrying about everyhting else.jesus is real as in the imaginition of..we all fall in love with the thought of jesus and who he was ..thast all

[dre 0]

i think that jesus is just an imaginary friend for grown ups and the devil is the person we blame all our problems on therfore making jesus someone who does in fact in my mind not exist.jesus was a story that was trying to show us how to be a better person but we have made it into a whole debate about it...just take out the main point of the story and leave the book alone(bible) live ur life and stop worrying about everyhting else.jesus is real as in the imaginition of..we all fall in love with the thought of jesus and who he was ..thast all

I have a lack of respect for those who believe in the Jesus-myth theory. It does not take much effort to acknowledge the historical documents and the circumstantial evidence. I hold Jesus-mythicists in the same respect as Holocaust deniers.