New member, looking for discussion

[Randy_Carson]

If Livy was inaccurate in saying, for example, that “In 238 AD the Gauls launched a surprise attack on our fortifications at Patavium. In response the Senate…”, It doesn’t really matter to anyone.

If the bible is inaccurate in saying “mary was a virgin”, it does matter to a lot of people.

Therefore, the hisorical claims in the bible must stand up to higher scrutiny than those other writers you mentioned.

Well, then…you’re in luck.

The Bible does stand up to the higher scrutiny as my posting explains.

There are more and better extant manuscripts of biblical books than there are for any other ancient writing. This translates into: We can be more confident that the books we now know as the Bible are accurate than we can regarding any other work of similar age.

It appears that the Bible meets your first challenge. Next.

 

[Randy_Carson]

the ressurection is unproven - we don’t know if it happened or not.

We have the reliable testimony of eyewitnesses as recorded in a historically accurate book, the Bible.

you haven’t shown that the church is infallible, it is merely claimed and accepted as fact.

Again, a book, the Bible, which has been shown to be historically accurate, tells that that Jesus Christ is God. This same book also contains his promises to build and maintain His Church. Maintenance of that Church requires infallibility.

you haven’t shown that the church was established by a god.

Sorry for this omission…I did not realize you were unaware of these things. Here’s a VERY brief overview:

1. Jesus is God

Titus 2:12-14
12It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

2. Jesus Promises to Build a Church

Matthew 16:17-19
17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter,c] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hadesd] will not overcome it.e] 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will bef] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will beg] loosed in heaven.”

3. Jesus Promises the Church will be Infallible

Matthew 16:17-19
17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

 

[Randy_Carson]

From another site:

First, I would like to point out that Paul wrote several years before the Gospels were written, some time between 50 and 60 ce (a short 20 - 30 years after Jesus’ purported ministry). Because of this, we have to take care not to project our knowledge of what later writings (like the Gospels) say onto what Paul said earlier. Since the Gospels are clear that Jesus’ resurrection was a physical bodily resurrection, we are tempted to project that understanding back into Paul’s earlier description of the resurrection. But Paul’s own notion of the resurrection does not appear to be the same as the Gospel-writer’s notion. If you look closely at the body of Pauline epistles, you will find no clear indication that Paul considers Jesus’ resurrection to be bodily in the sense that Jesus’ dead body was resurrected. As far as we can tell from his writings, Paul seems to believe that the resurrection was spiritual - Jesus’ spirit was quickened and he now has a new heavenly body, not his corrupted human body that was buried. If he thought the resurrection was bodily and that anyone had seen Jesus resurrected body, he surely would have mentioned this important detail in his discourses about the resurrected Christ.

Rubbish.

In the book of Acts, Paul states the following:

Acts 24:20-21
20Or these who are here should state what crime they found in me when I stood before the Sanhedrin— 21unless it was this one thing I shouted as I stood in their presence: ‘It is concerning the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you today.’ "

And here is a lengthy passage from Paul’s first letter to the Church at Corinth in which he discusses the resurrection of Christ and of believers is some detail:

1 Corinthians 15:1-20
1Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

3For what I received I passed on to you as of first importancea]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Peter,**(“http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=15&version=31&context=chapter#fen-NIV-28708b”)] and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
9For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them—yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. 11Whether, then, it was I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.

**The Resurrection of the Dead **

12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.
20But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.

 

[Randy_Carson]

If the martyrs existed (which you haven’t shown), their claims (which you haven’t shown they made), show only that they believed that jesus was resurrected. The belief of one or more persons does not provide reliable evidence that something is true.

Just out of curiosity, have you ever read a history book?

Or are you suggesting that those Christians who died in Nero’s circus are just a myth?

A little Wiki for you:

The circus was the site of the first organized, state-sponsored martyrdoms of Christians in 65. Tradition holds that two years later, Saint Peter and many other Christians shared their fate. The circumstances were described in detail by Tacitus in a well-known passage of the Annals, (xv.44).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circus_of_Nero

 

[Randy_Carson]

Another question just popped up:

Given the following information:
-The church considers human life to be most sacred, and animals are nothing in comparison
-The church considers humans to have immortal souls, but animals not
-humans, as all animals, have evolved from common ancestry.

At what point did a god give homo sapiens a soul? 10,000 years ago? 1,000,000 years ago? Longer? How is this point delineated?

Did a god give a soul to homo neanderthalensis (neanderthals), which evolved in parallel with homo sapiens, but have now died out ?

Did a god give a soul to homo habilis, a precursor to homo sapiens?

Thanks for your help.

The Church has no position on theses matters save this: God gave a human soul to two of our forefathers that are now known as Adam and Eve. All men are descended from these two.

Beyond this, you are free to speculate all you want about when and how He did it.

Oh, and you’re welcome!

 

[VociMike]

Just out of curiosity, have you ever read a history book?

Or are you suggesting that those Christians who died in Nero’s circus are just a myth?

That would seem to be what he is suggesting. Perhaps it is easier to make that claim than to try and explain why people would allow themselves to be brutally murdered for a lie they themselves made up, and could disavow with but a single word. I know I’d come clean if it meant avoiding a brutal death.

 

[redhen]

Just a brief comment. I’ve come to agreement with Fr. Robert Barron and his explanations for different forms of knowledge. Taken from his Youtube comments:

youtube.com/watch?v=p8YTre3xqXg&feature=channel_page

If you’re trying to analyze physical realities, the empirical sciences are most reliable. But if you’re looking into subjects such as the human psyche, ethics, the nature of justice, the first cause of being, other epistemic paths are preferable.

Many materialists say something to the effect of “if science can’t describe it, measure it, or analyze it, it’s not real”.

Hmm, how did they come to that conclusion? Did they empirically prove it? This claim is in fact a *philosophical *claim, and they’ve just hung themselves on their own claim.

 

[wasmit]

I could go through and give answers to the various points listed above, but all of it really boils down to a question of faith.
When you were fifteen you rejected religion and faith in God as being “Silly”. That is certainly your right. You placed all of your faith in what you can see and discern for yourself as “verifieable” and “provable”. Placing your intellect at the pinnacle and above all other reason. That too is your right.
In many of the cases placed before you here by myself and others you express the simple fact that “There could be other explanations”. which is certainly true. However, you seem to prefer the “other” explanation to admitting the possibility that the right explanation is God. Again that is your right.

Thanks for your reply.

I am looking for a demonstration that a god exists. When I say “There may be another explanation for this”, I do not choose any explanation as true, as you claim that I seem to do. I do not have a predisposition to prefer one version over another. I admit the possibility that the explanation may be a deity.

Our faith in God, while it might prove silly and futile, promises the possibility of Life eternal. It feeds us on a good and just set of life principles. It is a creative and positive faith and not a negative one. What does your faith offer your. Nothing but death. Maintaining such a faith without even allowing the possibility of God actually assures you of that outcome - death.

I don’t have any faith in anything. I allow for the possibility of a deity. I have no problem with death being the end for my consciousness. Should I ?

You might want to ask yourself this question. Assuming for the moment that God DOES exist, and that theBible IS true, who would want to influence you to believe the way you do? Who would want you to close your mind to the possibility of God’s goodness or even existance?

If the bible is true, the answer is in there. I haven’t read it thoroughly. Myabe a demon? I don’t know.

Another question that you might want to consider is this. If your view is so certain and logical, why are there many scientists and other highly educated people who are just as positive of God’s existance?

My view is not certain, but it is logical. I don’t know the reasons why other people think the way they do. I’m trying to find the reasons in this thread, and have already found some.

As to whether you were praying right, I am in no position to judge. All I know is that Jesus taught us that the way to salvation is not easy, the door is narrow, and most do not find it. The writings of the great saints and mystics of the Church bear this out, that the road to holiness is difficult and not without it’s own fears and sorrows.

What does these metaphors mean? Can you be more specific? I don’t really know what you are saying. When I did that prayer, I did it in the way I was taught when I was young.

Finally I would offer something that I found most helpful and convincing on my own journey. That is the apparition at Fatima. Granted, you can say that such things might have other explanations. However, the most compelling thing about this particular apparition is the fact that it happened to such small children in such a remote place. That it occurred over the course of many months and that nothing - no threats or punishment of any kind could make these small children recant or change their stories. Not even when they were put in a jail and threatened with torture.

I looked for information about the Fatima event, and this is what I found.

The available recounts Fatima story are so contradictory that nothing of substance can be gathered from these retellings, even though the event was only 80 years ago.

Just because we don’t know the explanation does not mean, “God did it.”

In a 12-page commentary, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger said that Lucia, now a 93-year-old cloistered Carmelite nun, might have conjured her vision from devotional books.
sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/06/27/MN7921.DTL

Add to this the obvious fact of so many people seeing the “sign of the sun”.
An open mind might be able to expalin away various aspects of the events, but an open mind also cannot dismiss out of hand the possibility that this is a true and very real sign of God’s Love for His children.

I agree, I cannot discount the possibility that it was the doing of a deity.

 

[wasmit]

And yet you refuse to concede points that a reasonable person would be compelled to concede, such as that the Romans and the Jewish hierarchary would have had the power to confiscate the body of Jesus Christ. By refusing to concede the obvious, you indicate that perhaps your mind is not as open as you think it is.

I don’t know that this is true, as I have never seen the information explaining the situation. Can you please provide links to documents?

It would be the same if you has said “It is obvious that in an internal combustion engine, the Fuel injection rate must be at least 0.001 Litres per second”. I have no idea if this is true or not because I know nothing about internal combustion engines.

 

[wasmit]

Hi again wasmit,

To answer your questions, first “yes”, but I chose not ,believe that it may be wrong or I would have no comfort. Secondly, “no” I don’t get an uneasy feeling because there’s no conflict. For example, if a person really believes absolutely that science will one day find the answers to all of mankinds questions, then they will naturally find reasons to support that idea as credible, while finding ways to discredit any opposing thought. it’s all about a persons belief system and how they choose is the way it develops. I believe that in your OP you said that you started out going to church, mostly because your parents made you, and then when you got older and went to college you started to question things and started believing some of the things that you learned there. You made the choice and chose the wisdom of the atheistic teachings on campus as apposed to the wisdom of your parents and the Christian instuctions that you had received. I think that choosing to believe in Christ would be your best option, but you have to make that decision.

Thanks for the explaination.

 

[VociMike]

I don’t know that this is true, as I have never seen the information explaining the situation. Can you please provide links to documents?

It would be the same if you has said “It is obvious that in an internal combustion engine, the Fuel injection rate must be at least 0.001 Litres per second”. I have no idea if this is true or not because I know nothing about internal combustion engines.

Do you know nothing about the Roman Empire? Do you not know that the Romans were the all-powerful rulers of the Jewish lands at the time of Jesus?

Do you not know that the Jewish hierarchy was powerful enough to have Jesus crucified under Roman law even though the Romans found that he had committed no crime?

C’mon, you must have some understanding of the exercise of power in past times. Which is to say, those in power did whatever the heck they chose to do.

 

[wasmit]

wasmit: I just saw your reply to my post. Why did you feel it was necessary to insult me by saying I sound crazy and delusional? Please answer. I am very insulted. You know there are real people behind these anonymous postings, and I was actually trying to offer you some help. What I was trying to say (perhaps in a deep or convoluted way) is that I think your OP indicates that you are indeed searching (or seeking) a relationship with a higher being - namely God, and I was trying offer you some constructive and in fact thoughtful advice on where to go- because when I was in my 20s I was in the same place spiritually. Please remember next time you call someone on the internet crazy and delusional, whether you would do the same thing to my face. If not, then stop and think before you post.

I did not intend to insult you.

Can you please explain your advice more clearly and thoroughly?

Everything I type here I would say to a person in a conversation.

 

[block]

Well, I think you’re going about this the wrong way. An athiest cannot become a believer unless the change happens through God. Ask Him for signs, otherwise, I don’t believe that proof will be found for you, and I don’t believe that we will be able to change you.

Jesus said, you look for signs but there will come a time when no signs will be available, blessed are those who believe without seeing for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Not a quote because I don’t know it word for word. Good Luck. Peace.

 

[wasmit]

Do you know nothing about the Roman Empire? Do you not know that the Romans were the all-powerful rulers of the Jewish lands at the time of Jesus?

Do you not know that the Jewish hierarchy was powerful enough to have Jesus crucified under Roman law even though the Romans found that he had committed no crime?

C’mon, you must have some understanding of the exercise of power in past times. Which is to say, those in power did whatever the heck they chose to do.

I know that the Romans had conquered the mediterranean, but I don’t know any exact dates or places, or the strength of their rule of each of the areas they conquered.

I don’t know anything about jewish heirachy.

 

[wasmit]

Ask Him for signs, otherwise, I don’t believe that proof will be found for you, and I don’t believe that we will be able to change you.

How?

Jesus said, you look for signs but there will come a time when no signs will be available, blessed are those who believe without seeing for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Not a quote because I don’t know it word for word. Good Luck. Peace.

 

[wasmit]

AHA, but isn’t your cognitive certainty of Death also uncomfortable?

I don’t feel uncomfrotable about it, no. And it is not a certainty, I am not certain.

It seems to me as I am reading through the posts and your responses that you really are not able so much able to refute God as to simply question His existance. This is not an answer but rather it simply leaves you with the questions.

I don’t intend to pose arguments to refute a god, though if you think that it will help demonstrate the existence of a god, I will post these arguments.

I thought it would be rude to come here and say “gods don’t exist look at all these reasons why”, as I understand that this is not the purpose of this section of the forums.

I am questioning the arguments that others have posed, as they are not rational, or not reasonable, or unsubstiantiated, or not persuasive, etc…

Personally, in my belief in God, all the other “explanations” re: creation, the substance of the universe, evolution, miracles, etc. all simply become mechanisms God Chooses to use. They do not necessarily contradict God. Thus, even were my belief turn out to be untrue, I could not see it as being something “unfomfortable”.

So you would continue to believe in the catholic trinity god if it was unquestionably shown to be false?

I don’t get how a person can do that. Can you please explain that?

 

[JRKH]

Thanks for your reply.

Your welcome. I apologize if I have missed some things on the thread, but as I have said before, I sometimes can’t get on and study the way I would like to.
I may not address every issue you bring up but will do my best to be a support in your quest for Truth.

I am looking for a demonstration that a god exists. When I say “There may be another explanation for this”, I do not choose any explanation as true, as you claim that I seem to do. I do not have a predisposition to prefer one version over another. I admit the possibility that the explanation may be a deity.

This is good. My only comment would be that you don’t necessarily have to choose one or the other. For instance, I believe that God Created All things. I also believe that Evolution is the mechanism by which life developed on the earth. The various, “Alternative”, explanations for natural things do not preclude there being both a God AND a mechanism.

I don’t have any faith in anything. I allow for the possibility of a deity. I have no problem with death being the end for my consciousness. Should I ?

As to your final question here, I guess it comes down to the old adage of, If your right, then we’ll both be dead after death, If I’m right then we’ll both be alive after death and one of us is liable to be in big trouble.
Of course that doesn’t help in your search right now so we’ll leave that go.

If the bible is true, the answer is in there. I haven’t read it thoroughly. Myabe a demon? I don’t know.

As for reading the Bible, I would suggest being careful in this. Not because the Bible is not True or anything, but that it is not really a primer for faith. It combines history and theology and prophesy in ways that can be quite confusing.
I’ll be honest and say that I haven’t read a great deal of the Bible because I am simply not that well educated on it.
That being said I would suggest that you concentrate on the Gospels since it is in and through them that The Old Testament is fullfilled and it is through them that All Christians find their belief and Salvation.
As to finding the kind of “Proof” of God you seem to be seeking I don’t know if you can find it there. However I think that we can agree that in the NT we are seeing the recording of the same momentous events from several different people who were all witnesses, or knew witness of the events.
Pretty powerful stuff.

My view is not certain, but it is logical. I don’t know the reasons why other people think the way they do. I’m trying to find the reasons in this thread, and have already found some.

I’m glad to hear that you are finding our company useful.

What does these metaphors mean? Can you be more specific? I don’t really know what you are saying. When I did that prayer, I did it in the way I was taught when I was young.

If you read the Gospels (and don’t try to disect every verse) you’ll see that, no matter how good a person is, Jesus is always calling them on to more Holiness. A rich man who has obeyed all the Mosaic Law since Childhood is challenged to, “sell all he has, give to the poor, and come follow (Jesus)”. Another time Jesus tells his followers that if they have faith the size of a mustard seed they could move a mountain and cast it into the sea. Jesus never would allow his followers to “rest on their laurals”. Jesus often used analogies and parables; “The kingdom of heaven is like…” and so forth.

Allow me to use a more modern analogy regarding prayer and the call to holiness. Three young men decide that they want to try to make it to the NFL. They recognize that this is a lofty goal that requires a very real commitment so they dedicate themselves to training and playing and learning the game. They eat it, dream it, talk it, and live it. Everyone who knows them knows they want to make the big time. Once they get into highschool one fellow is too involved with girls and running around so eventually drops away from his friends. The other two make it all the way through College together and are scouted by the Pro’s. ONe fellow gets drafted and the other does not but does go on to a prophitable career in coaching.
The moral is that those who persevered toward their aim, even though it was a difficult task with a distant and unclear goal, were able to achieve much. The very process strengthened them and made them better people.

The same is true for praying and the Call to Holiness. It must be practiced and it requires a dedication.

does this help?

ed for information about the Fatima event, and this is what I found.

The available recounts Fatima story are so contradictory that nothing of substance can be gathered from these retellings, even though the event was only 80 years ago.

Just because we don’t know the explanation does not mean, “God did it.”

In a 12-page commentary, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger said that Lucia, now a 93-year-old cloistered Carmelite nun, might have conjured her vision from devotional books.
sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/06/27/MN7921.DTL

I agree, I cannot discount the possibility that it was the doing of a deity.

The overall thing that impressed me about Fatima is that it happened to relatively small children, they were taught a prayer which the Devil could never utter, (thus proving it was not demonic) and that the Children were so sure and secure in the face of such strong adult opposition.
However, I won’t push this with you. You looked and can evaluate on your own.

Overall I think that you are going to find that the preponderance of evidence suggests a God more so than suggests the absense of God. This in the final analysis may be the best we can hope for.

Peace
James

 

[jmcrae]

That would seem to be what he is suggesting. Perhaps it is easier to make that claim than to try and explain why people would allow themselves to be brutally murdered for a lie they themselves made up, and could disavow with but a single word. I know I’d come clean if it meant avoiding a brutal death.

Heck, I’d do that just to avoid being made fun of, never mind the brutal death - if I thought Christianity was a lie, I sure wouldn’t be practicing it - I’d be one of those “super-smart” cool people that goes around debunking it.

When human beings began to use fire, make art, and cook their food, they also began burying their dead in such a manner as suggested a belief in an afterlife and future bodily resurrection - preserving the body, protecting it from animals, dressing the body in fine clothing, and packing food, tools, and other items that would come in handy if the person were to be raised from the dead at some future time.

The resurrection of Jesus, recorded by His witnesses, together with His teachings, prove the essential elements of this rudimentary ancestral religion to be true. The Catholic Church is, I believe, the place to find the rest of the story, because of the fact that it is Jesus who actually founded the Catholic Church.

 

[JRKH]

So you would continue to believe in the catholic trinity god if it was unquestionably shown to be false?

I don’t get how a person can do that. Can you please explain that?

The only way that I would be able to answer that is to be shown this “unquestionalbe” proof. Of course you are demonstrating that anything can be questioned.

Seriously though I have always subscribed to a simple credo to reconsile science and God. That is that no matter how many questions science answers there are always more questions. Beyond these questions resides God.

Peace
James

 

[bluedogz]

Well, there’s a lot of folks here that know more than me, but I had to throw in one answer that jumped out at me after reading the whole thread…

Wasmit:

how do you know that a god has given humans free will?

Because you’re here arguing about it. That’s it.