A
_A
Guest
Was his only job-search technique prayer? Why would he send out resumes? Why not just pray?
- Status
P
Pax
Guest
So you’re talking about the establishment of the canon. I was willing to let you explain yourself because your original statement was an otherwise absurd allegation. Thank you for at least making some sense out of that remark.
Nevetheless, the establishment of the canon doesn’t resemble your rhetorical question which read. “Did you know that the church has been editing this bible for a long, long time.” Your sarcasm is unwarranted.
Nevetheless, the establishment of the canon doesn’t resemble your rhetorical question which read. “Did you know that the church has been editing this bible for a long, long time.” Your sarcasm is unwarranted.
P
Pax
Guest
These are not simply stories about martyrs that were eye witnesses. These things are historical fact. Likewise, the miracles of Jesus were not magicians tricks at least according to the historical records. Please prove that the martyrs were delusional and were hallucinating since that is your claim.
If you cannot see the differences between the jihadists and the eye witnesses of the early church then you have serious problems in logic. I pointed out the differences and you should be able to appreciate them.
P
Pax
Guest
A
Do you hallucinate your unbelief? Have you merely been duped by your atheistic mentors? Is yours all a delusion? Is all the history and science that you attempt to explain things just manipulated by atheists for the sake of trickery? Are the atheistic explanations nothing more than sophistry? Is the whole atheistic dog and pony show just a David Blaine exhibition of denial?
Do you hallucinate your unbelief? Have you merely been duped by your atheistic mentors? Is yours all a delusion? Is all the history and science that you attempt to explain things just manipulated by atheists for the sake of trickery? Are the atheistic explanations nothing more than sophistry? Is the whole atheistic dog and pony show just a David Blaine exhibition of denial?
L
look3467
Guest
Two things:
Love gives of self, and love forgives others.
God is ever so patient, He waits in hope as parents do, when a child goes away and doesn’t return readily.
Peace>>>AJ
Love gives of self, and love forgives others.
God is ever so patient, He waits in hope as parents do, when a child goes away and doesn’t return readily.
Peace>>>AJ
N
notself
Guest
I just finished Googling “miracle stories in the new testament” and got this link.
catholic-resources.org/Bible/Miracles.htm
You will note that it compares all renditions of the miracles of the New Testament. Under the heading “Healings” there are only two miracles reported by all four Gospels. The first was a healing of the paralytic. The second was giving sight to the blind.
I would think that all miraculous healings would have been reported in all of the Gospels.
Of the healing of a paralytic, could this have been a temporary healing similar to that performed by Benny Hinn? The people who are lame are so convinced of being healed that some actually walk for a short while (placebo effect), but it does not last.
Of the curing of blindness, the Gospels do not agree on whether one man was cured or two. Honey and medicinal clays have been used in healing for thousands of years. Could this have been a case of curing an infection in the eyes by the use of honey?
members.tripod.com/~Bee_Mann/honey1.html
Are there alternative solutions to the miracles in the New Testament that are realistic, plausible for the time, and non supernatural? Have you given thought to the possibility?
P
Pax
Guest
Why should this be so? The synoptic gospels are the most similar but are not identicle in every way or detail. This is actually the most likely scenario for something that is true. Furthermore, each author is writing to a different audience. If the presentations were the same we would only need one gospel written by one author. Moreover, genuine testimonies generally have this kind of character as opposed to those that are contrived.
The gospel of John is written differently from the synoptics and is a more theologically oriented presentation of Jesus. It assumes familiarity with the synoptics. For example, John never even bothers to introduce the twelve apostles. John assumes that the readers are familiar with the synoptics. The listing of miracles in John’s gospel has little overlap as well.
Volumes have been written on the gospels including the authors purposes and audiences. Likewise, none of the gospels speak of all of Jesus miracles. They even mention the fact that they do not do so.
Could these miracles have simply been natural cures of the times, and have I considered this. Well, reading the gospel accounts leads me to conclude otherwise. The authors would not have written what they did about the miracles if they were simple folk cures or temporary in nature. Such things as the multiplication of the loaves and fishes on two different occassions, the walking on water, changing water into wine, the exorcisms, the transfiguration, the healing of the woman with a hemmorage, raising Lazarus from the dead, along with numerous other miracles that I can cite off the top of my head, as well as the resurrection are not the stuff of folk lore rememdies and parlor tricks.
A
Aleii
Guest
I understand this. Just as long as we agree that it is not simply black and white.
We can give it a shot.
Its not abuse of power of which I refer to there, its over-encompassing issues for the entire Bible as was mentioned prior, such as psychology and comparison of religions, as well as omniscience vs free will, and god’s ability to transmit messages. I think we may be able to get further on these items through other discussion. As for allegory, I’m just pointing out that I am attaching things that I am also referring to in addition to allegory(cultural/spiritual/etc); I am not trying to redefine allegory, nor do I mean solely allegory which may have been implied earlier.
Good, I think we’ve come to an understanding.
Ok, I can already partially reconcile this through allegory/symbolism/etc, but I’m interested to hear your point of view if you take this as more of an actual/literal event.
A
_A
Guest
Let’s make up names to simplify. Your martyr, Jake, believes he witnessed Jesus do a bunch of impossible things. The Jihadist, Ali, believes he witnessed Allah directly telling him to kill infidels. Those beliefs are equally valid.
Your fellows believe that they saw things. Is it more reasonable to believe that a man actually performed miracles, or that he convinced everyone present that they witnessed miracles? I say, since we know that humans love to trick people, and are quite capable of doing so, that it is much more likely that they were tricked - all of them, Jake and Ali alike. You are making claims that these extraordinary events happened, the burden of proof is not on everyone else, it is on you.
A
_A
Guest
Lack of belief doesn’t require an hallucination.
Maybe, but they have not asked me to believe anything. They offer better theories, in general, than religion.
I can’t stress this enough - maybe so. It is *highly doubtful, for reasons I will explain soon.
Let me tell you why I think it is not.
Independent verification.
Nice eh? It means that the answers that science has gained access to are available to anyone who wants to acquire the knowledge to understand them. You yourself have told me that I am not reading the bible correctly, mainly because I am not drawing the same conclusion as you. Also, there is a reward in science for disproving a theory. When someone does such a thing for the church, well, think about Galileo and the way he was treated for looking up the answers to some questions.
Atheism has no beliefs, so there is little to trick people about anyway.*
A
_A
Guest
Weren’t all the books written later? The Holy Spirit doesn’t print bibles - men with printing presses do. The church doesn’t have a fax from heaven, someone had to decide which books were acceptable, and which weren’t. Many books were written in the past. Some about the apostles, some from earlier. All these books were sifted, and the ones which furthered the right goals were the ones accepted. The ‘right goals’ may well have been an accurate account of history. That doesn’t change the fact that the holy spirit has never been seen operating a printing press.
A
_A
Guest
I am not sure why you are quoting poetry, but if this was meant to be a description of love, I am afraid you have failed to describe it any better than the quote ‘I am love’. (might be good for poetry, but useless in describing it)
A
_A
Guest
I check a lot of things that I am told are not needed. Some things I don’t bother with. My sweetheart told me that ‘romantic love’ is an invention of man and was unheard of not too long ago. Sounds right to me. I think people’s feelings are not so easy to understand.
You are the one who brought love into this, why rely on me to explain it.
By the way, I will walk to work today, and yes, I will check my gear before I go, even though it was fine yesterday.
I had a friend die yesterday. The truck he was in fell through the ice. He didn’t check the thickness of some ice before his crew drove out on it.
I check relentlessly because this world is a harsh and unforgiving place. Perhaps especially up in the north here.
A
_A
Guest
Thanks, Notself. I had thought only of trickery, your research brings a much more sensible possibility to the mix.
A
_A
Guest
Well, were there any more books written before the bible was assembled? There were many.
Why didn’t they get in? Why didn’t the ‘Beowulf’ story get in, for example?
Some men picked and chose what seemed divine, and what they thought was fiction. Some men with a specific agenda, too. I can’'t say exactly what that agenda was, but it has built a church with hundreds of millions to hand out to fix the damage that dirty priests have done. Wow, thats a lot of money. I wonder why the church is sitting on hundreds of millions while members of St.Pat’s parish here in town are living in poverty…must be the will of Yahweh, right?
- Status