This reminds me of the “problem” of the Bermuda triangle. There is a folklore that more ships disappear in the Bermuda triangle than in some other areas of proportionate areas. The fact shows the opposite. It is just another example of GIGO.
Selective sampling.Jesus’ message is the message of the Bible, and it’s the message of the Church as well. It’s not like there are three messages out there.
Umm… you’re the one who brought up that particular example, remember?
If you think that Jesus was just a nice guy with a cool philosophy, then yeah. But, that’s not who he is. So, if you want to really understand what Jesus was saying, you have to understand it in context. You can’t just separate “philosophy” from His whole message.
“Jewish people listen to Jesus”… except when he says that He’s God. And when He says that salvation is through Him. Etc, etc, etc. So… if you want to say “folks listen to part of what Jesus says”, then I’d get that. But, I’d respond with what Augustine said (IIRC), which could be paraphrased as: “if you take what you like from Jesus’ teachings, and leave out what you don’t like, then you’re not following Jesus… you’re following yourself.”
So, you know that we call Jesus the “Word of God”, right? And you know that we call the Bible the “Word of God”, right? So… if it’s in the Bible, then it’s Jesus’ message.
That something is not in conflict with God doesn’t make it caused by God, right?
That would be an invalid conclusion, especially if it only proceeds from something that you’re surmising (aside from any evidence for or against the supposition!).
Other than the existence of the world itself. And the Savior whom God sent to the world. Other than that… yeah, nothing.
No. God created Lourdes, and God created ‘home’. Why would healings at one place over the other be a proof for God? By that standard, wouldn’t all healings be proof of God’s existence?
Why do people go to lourds if it doesnt make any difference?? Are you saying it doesnt make a difference??Barnesy:
No. God created Lourdes, and God created ‘home’. Why would healings at one place over the other be a proof for God? By that standard, wouldn’t all healings be proof of God’s existence?
People go to Lourdes in order to pray. Prayer makes a difference.
Nope. But, I am saying that miraculous healings aren’t the only reason to seek God.
First you said it was Jesus arguments you used and you said two things that he said to show me thats what you meant. Not stuff that was just in the bible (like stoning people) or stuff that the church said. If you meant the church then you should have told the other guy that you use church arguments. Thats all.Barnesy:
Jesus’ message is the message of the Bible, and it’s the message of the Church as well. It’s not like there are three messages out there.
Umm… you’re the one who brought up that particular example, remember?
If you think that Jesus was just a nice guy with a cool philosophy, then yeah. But, that’s not who he is. So, if you want to really understand what Jesus was saying, you have to understand it in context. You can’t just separate “philosophy” from His whole message.
“Jewish people listen to Jesus”… except when he says that He’s God. And when He says that salvation is through Him. Etc, etc, etc. So… if you want to say “folks listen to part of what Jesus says”, then I’d get that.
So, you know that we call Jesus the “Word of God”, right? And you know that we call the Bible the “Word of God”, right? So… if it’s in the Bible, then it’s Jesus’ message.
Remember that I said this is just my personal theory; it is not some kind of fact!
So if it makes a difference we should look to see how many people get well if they stay home and pray. Maybe theres no need to go all the way to lourds to pray and spend all that money.Barnesy:
People go to Lourdes in order to pray. Prayer makes a difference.
Nope. But, I am saying that miraculous healings aren’t the only reason to seek God.
Sorry annie!! Yes it was just a theory. I shouldnt of said that we werent allowed to know. Maybe we are.Barnesy:
Remember that I said this is just my personal theory; it is not some kind of fact!
@Spaten
Here’s the thing, though: “church arguments” don’t proceed from humans. Their basis is in Jesus. So, if we’re pointing into why arguments are valid, the correct answer is: because they proceed from Jesus.
If they want to look at a subset of his teachings, sure. As for the full context of his teachings… well, “listening to what Jesus said” leads to belief in him as God and Savior.
I don’t think that’s where I’d start. After all, he’d bail when he would ask why he should listen to Jesus and I gave my reason. No, the place to start with an atheist is why it’s reasonable to assert the existence of God.
sigh. Back to that strawman, eh? No… the Bible is also a record of the history of the people of God, and as such, there’s not just God’s commands, but also the ways in which people don’t live up to what God has in mind.
Not sure what you think you’ve proven. You’ve set up a proposition that no one would agree with, and you seem to want to use it to ‘prove’ that the Bible isn’t the Word of God. Umm… no.
Well, that’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to hold that opinion… but that doesn’t mean that your opinion is accurate.
No, I didn’t. I pointed out that the Word of God is the Word of God. The Church would say that all truth proceeds from God. So, someone can pick up on the truth… but that doesn’t imply that the truth is his, rather than God’s. So… no: the fact that we see it in the Old Testament doesn’t mean that it didn’t come from God. (You recall that Jesus is God, and has existed for all eternity, right?)
If I made a mistake or misspoke? Sure. That’s not what’s going on here, though.
Again: the purpose of prayer isn’t to “hit it big”.
If you think that a visit to Lourdes assures you of getting what you want, then yeah… maybe you should stay at home. Superstition isn’t what the Catholic Church is all about – belief in God, though, is.
Two miracles
No its true that some things in the bible like killing people for working on Sunday are not things that Jesus would say and are not things that the church teaches. So maybe what you meant to say is that some parts of the bible are the words of God and some parts are Jesus arguments and some parts are what the church teaches.Barnesy:
Well, that’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to hold that opinion… but that doesn’t mean that your opinion is accurate.
No, I didn’t. I pointed out that the Word of God is the Word of God. The Church would say that all truth proceeds from God. So, someone can pick up on the truth… but that doesn’t imply that the truth is his, rather than God’s. So… no: the fact that we see it in the Old Testament doesn’t mean that it didn’t come from God. (You recall that Jesus is God, and has existed for all eternity, right?)
If I made a mistake or misspoke? Sure. That’s not what’s going on here, though.
No. All parts of the Bible are “the words of God.” Some describe human actions, some describe Jesus’ earthly ministry. All are the Word of God.
What I showed you was that Jesus’ teaching was over and above the Golden Rule. What you showed me was what some anonymous person wrote on Wiki.
I didn’t make a mistake.
If all the parts are the words of God then you cant use some of them. You have to choose which ones to use. You have to say that. The church doesnt teach everything in the bible. I keep saying this but you just say some thing different each time.Barnesy:
No. All parts of the Bible are “the words of God.” Some describe human actions, some describe Jesus’ earthly ministry. All are the Word of God.
What I showed you was that Jesus’ teaching was over and above the Golden Rule. What you showed me was what some anonymous person wrote on Wiki.
I didn’t make a mistake.
People were not killed just for working on the Sabbath. If someone forgot it was the Sabbath, or if a foreigner in Israel didn’t understand the rule, then they would not be put to death.
If millions of people go to the same place then if they are going to get better any way then its easy to say its because they went there. The stories didnt say if they were taking medicine. Ill bet they were if they were sick. So we still need to know how many people get better on their own if they stay at home. And i bet there wont be ma y stories because its not interesting enough. If a man gets cured if he goes to lourdes then people will write about it. But if he gets better by staying at home then its a boring story and nobody writes about it.Barnesy:
Two miracles
Ten miracles (shorter descriptions than above)
List with brief descriptions of all declared miraculous healings at Lourdes
You will see that some of the conditions which were cured are not like some illnesses which have known spontaneous remissions, and others are illnesses we no longer seem to have.
The fact that so many cures of very serious conditions have occurred in one place needs to be taken into account as well. We have the idea of “cancer clusters,” where more people than average get cancer; Lourdes seems to have a “cure cluster.”
But georgias said he was using Jesus arguments against the person who was an Atheist. Then he changed that and said he was using the bible because its the word of God. Then he changed that again and said he was using the church. But Jesus and the church dont use killing people as an argument. And even if its in the bible its not an argument he could use any way. Just because its in the bible doesnt mean its right. It says you can stone a woman to death as well which any one will say is wrong.Barnesy:
People were not killed just for working on the Sabbath. If someone forgot it was the Sabbath, or if a foreigner in Israel didn’t understand the rule, then they would not be put to death.
The person who would be put to death for working on the Sabbath was doing so in a spirit of rebellion; it was a form of treason as God was the highest authority in Israel. Rebelling against God could put the entire kingdom at risk.
Even now, we see this principle reflected in the treatment of mortal sin.
Why? Why do I have to say “choose parts but not the whole”?
It doesn’t? How do you reach that conclusion?
Jesus’ arguments are the Word of God, and they are reflected in the teachings of the Church! There’s no inconsistency there!