doogie, there were sources for everything in that article, I took them out for ease of reading. I was going to re-post the whole thing for you with footnotes, but then I changed my mind because if you really want to know you can do a Google search. I am tired of arguing with you. Unless you can drop your presuppositions, I have nothing more to say to you.
[quote]JPBear wrote:
Here are some neat scientific facts in the Bible (from wayofthemaster.com):
At a time when it was believed that the earth sat on a large animal or a giant (1500 B.C.), the Bible spoke of the earth’s free float in space: “He…hangs the earth upon nothing” (Job 26:7).
The prophet Isaiah also tells us that the earth is round: “It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth” (Isaiah 40:22). This is not a reference to a flat disk, as some skeptic maintain, but to a sphere. Secular man discovered this 2,400 years later. At a time when science believed that the earth was flat, is was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world.
God told Job in 1500 B.C.: “Can you send lightnings, that they may go, and say to you, Here we are?” (Job 38:35). The Bible here is making what appears to be a scientifically ludicrous statement?that light can be sent, and then manifest itself in speech.
But did you know that radio waves travel at the speed of light? This is why you can have instantaneous wireless communication with someone on the other side of the earth. Science didn’t discover this until 1864 when “British scientist James Clerk Maxwell suggested that electricity and light waves were two forms of the same thing” (Modern Century Illustrated Encyclopedia).
Job 38:19 asks, “Where is the way where light dwells?” Modern man has only recently discovered that light (electromagnetic radiation) has a “way,” traveling at 186,000 miles per second.
Science has discovered that stars emit radio waves, which are received on earth as a high pitch. God mentioned this in Job 38:7: “When the morning stars sang together…”
Solomon described a “cycle” of air currents two thousand years before scientists “discovered” them. “The wind goes toward the south, and turns about unto the north; it whirls about continually, and the wind returns again according to his circuits” (Ecclesiastes 1:6).
Science expresses the universe in five terms: time, space, matter, power, and motion. Genesis 1:1,2 revealed such truths to the Hebrews in 1450 B.C.: “In the beginning [time] God created [power] the heaven [space] and the earth [matter] . . . And the Spirit of God moved [motion] upon the face of the waters.” The first thing God tells man is that He controls of all aspects of the universe.
Only in recent years has science discovered that everything we see is composed of invisible atoms. Here, Scripture tells us that the “things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” (Hebrews 11:3)
Medical science has only recently discovered that blood-clotting in a newborn reaches its peak on the eighth day, then drops. The Bible consistently says that a baby must be circumcised on the eighth day.
The great biological truth concerning the importance of blood in our body’s mechanism has been fully comprehended only in recent years. Up until 120 years ago, sick people were “bled,” and many died because of the practice. If you lose your blood, you lose your life. Yet Leviticus 17:11, written 3,000 years ago, declared that blood is the source of life: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood.”
Encyclopedia Britannica documents that in 1845, a young doctor in Vienna named Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was horrified at the terrible death rate of women who gave birth in hospitals. As many as 30 percent died after giving birth. Semmelweis noted that doctors would examine the bodies of patients who died, then, without washing their hands, go straight to the next ward and examine expectant mothers.
This was their normal practice, because the presence of microscopic diseases was unknown. Semmelweis insisted that doctors wash their hands before examinations, and the death rate immediately dropped to 2 percent. Look at the specific instructions God gave His people for when they encounter disease: “And when he that has an issue is cleansed of his issue; then he shall number to himself even days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean” (Leviticus 15:13).
Until recent years, doctors washed their hands in a bowl of water, leaving invisible germs on their hands. However, the Bible says specifically to wash hands under “running water.”
"During the devastating Black Death of the fourteenth century, patients who were sick or dead were kept in the same rooms as the rest of the family. People often wondered why the disease was affecting so many people at one time. They attributed these epidemics to ‘bad air’ or ‘evil spirits.’ However, careful attention to the medical commands of God as revealed in Leviticus would have saved untold millions of lives.
Arturo Castiglione wrote about the overwhelming importance of this biblical medical law: ‘The laws against leprosyin Leviticus 13 may be regarded as the first model of sanitary legislation’ (A History of Medicine)."
Luke 17:34-36 says the Second Coming of Jesus Christ will occur while some are asleep at night and others are working at daytime activities in the field. This is a clear indication of a revolving earth, with day and night at the same time.
[/quote]
JP,
That was truly an exceptional post!
I thank you.
While I well know that there is no amount of “proof” that will convince anyone like doogie that Christ lived. Much less that he lived and died for our sins.
doogie must be convicted by the holy spirit for him to finally see the light. However, we as Christians are bound to continue to point him in the proper direction regardless of his current attitude.
As we all know the word of God never returns void!
Here is yet more “proof” that Christ lived.
I gleaned this from a fellow Christian and did not write it myself:
Historical writers mentioning Jesus:
Following is a list of extra biblical (outside of the Bible) references of biblical events, places, etc. The list is not exhaustive but is very representative of what is available.
Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?, a Jewish historian) mentions John the Baptist and Herod - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 5, par. 2
“Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness.”
Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions Jesus - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 3, par. 3.
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
There is debate among scholars as to the authenticity of this quote since it is so favorable to Jesus. For more information on this, please see Regarding the quotes from the historian Josephus about Jesus
Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions James, the brother of Jesus - Antiquities, Book 20, ch. 9.
“Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done.”
Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions Ananias the High Priest who was mentioned in Acts 23:2
Now as soon as Albinus was come to the city of Jerusalem, he used all his endeavors and care that the country might be kept in peace, and this by destroying many of the Sicarii. But as for the high priest, Ananias (25) he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money
Acts 23:2, “And the high priest Ananias commanded those standing beside him to strike him [Paul] on the mouth.”
Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian) mentions “christus” who is Jesus - Annals 15.44
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”
Ref. from http://classics.mit.edu/...s/annals.mb.txt
Thallus Circa AD 52, eclipse of the sun. Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. His writings are only found as citations by others. Julius Africanus who wrote about AD 221 mentioned Thallus’ account of an eclipse of the sun.
“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.”
Is this a reference to the eclipse at the crucifixion? Luke 23:44-45, “And it was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, 45 the sun being obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two.”
The oddity is that Jesus’ crucifixion occurred at the Passover which was a full moon. It is not possible for a solar eclipse to occur at a full moon. Note that Julius Africanus draws the conclusion that Thallus’ mentioning of the eclipse was describing the one at Jesus’ crucifixion. It may not have been.
Julius Africanus, Extant Writings, XVIII in the Ante?Nicene Fathers, ed. by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973), vol. VI, p. 130. as cited in Habermas, Gary R., The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company) 1996.
Pliny the Younger mentioned Christ. Pliny was governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. Pliny wrote ten books. The tenth around AD 112.
“They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food?but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.”
Pliny, Letters, transl. by William Melmoth, rev. by W.M.L. Hutchinson (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1935), vol. II, X:96 as cited in Habermas, Gary R., The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company) 1996.
The Talmud
“On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.” But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!”
Gal. 3:13, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.”
Luke 22:1, “Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was approaching. 2And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how they might put Him to death; for they were afraid of the people.”
This quotation was taken from the reading in The Babylonian Talmud, transl. by I. Epstein (London: Soncino, 1935), vol. III, Sanhedrin 43a, p. 281 as cited in Habermas, Gary R., The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company) 1996.
Lucian (circa 120-after 180) mentions Jesus. Greek writer and rhetorician.
“The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day?the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property.”
Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 11?13, in The Works of Lucian of Samosata, transl. by H.W. Fowler and F.G. Fowler, 4 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1949), vol. 4, as cited in Habermas, Gary R., The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ, (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company) 1996.
Though Lucian opposed Christianity, he acknowledges Jesus, that Jesus was crucified, that Christians worship him, and that this was done by faith.
[quote]doogie wrote:
You don’t know that. Have all the faith you want, but don’t speak in absolutes about things that you can’t prove.
[/quote]
Yet you speak in absolutes about everything you commment about…
[quote]bg100 wrote:
doogie wrote:
If nothing else, I’d love to hear why God didn’t have a better writing style.
Let’s see, the bible has historical narratives, proverbs, poetry, prophecies, eyewitness accounts and letters. What other writing styles are there?
As mentioned previously the bible is about God’s relationship with mankind, what better way of writing it than by men inspired by God to do so?[/quote]
What better way? A straight forward manner that would not ultimately lead even those who are willing to take it as the actual word of God to disagree on how to interpret it. If people who are willing to take it on blind faith can’t agree on what it means, what is the likely hood that people who are a little more “skeptical” are going to agree on its meaning?
[quote]
The other amazing thing is that you have all of these different books written by different people in different times and when put together the books just “fit” and point towards the same topic, what God has done for us through Christ. Something to think about anyway…[/quote]
You have no idea who even wrote the books.
You have no idea when the books were written.
You have no idea what details of the “facts” changed over the years when they were still passed down orally.
You can’t prove that Jesus even existed.
The one thing you do know (quoting Paine)is that “Jesus Christ wrote no account of himself, of his birth, parentage, or anything else. Not a line of what is called the New Testament is of his writing. The history of him is altogether the work of other people…”
There is NOTHING new and unique in the Christian story that wasn’t already found in pagan stories:
[quote]AlphaDragon wrote:
I find it very disturbing that the person who originally posted these “contradictions” simply copy/pasted instead of letting the Word of God speak to him (doing the research himself).
[/quote]
I’ve read the Bible front to back twice. I was Methodist up until my very late teens. Then I started having questions. Eventually the answer to the questions became, “You have to believe.” When God whispers in my ear, I will HAVE to believe. Until then I have to use the common sense God gave me to judge the truth of things.
I did make another attempt in my mid-20s to come back to the Bible. I attended many different church services. I took Judeo-Christian Tradition I and II at a little liberal arts school. The best closest I ever felt to God was when I was sitting with “Liberal Friends” in a silent Quaker service. I believe in God, but nothing about the Bible compels me to believe it.
Many of the things I posted disturbed the first and second times I read the Bible. Do you think I should have gone through the Bible before posting these and found them all on my own, and then typed them all out? Do you have that kind of time? That’s silly when they have been compiled already in many, many places already and I could just copy and paste them over.
If cutting and pasting is going to disturb you (and I don’t think it should), Haney’s use of websites should be the troubling thing. He’s the one who says the Bible is the infallable and complete word of God, therefore the onus is on him to prove it.
He’s an honest and good guy, and won’t deny he used the websites he’s linked to.
[quote]
If you are going to cast a stone, at least do the research yourself. It makes you not credible if you use someone elses words (especially if you don’t know exactly who made the original claims nor what their background is. Use your own brain.[/quote]
This is just assinine. Not one “source” a Christian has posted has come from an unbiased source.
How can there even be an unbiased source in this debate? If someone decides to research the Bible with a completely open mind, they will eventually come to one of three conclusions:
- They can’t prove it is true–that helps me more than Haney.
- They think they can prove it is true–Haney uses them.
- They think they can prove it isn’t true–I use them.
JPBear made the assertion that the Bible was the infallable and complete word of God with no evidence at all.
I responded with obvious contradictions compiled by many different people over the years–evidence.
Haney responded using other people’s rationalizatios of the contradictions–evidence.
Do you expect an non-believer to just say it’s not true, trust me?
[quote]doogie wrote:
“The Presbyterians were the first to get on the down line. They paid more attention to classical attainments and other branches of learning in their ministry than the Independents, while the Baptists had no academical institution of any kind. It would be an easy step in the wrong direction to pay increased attention to academical attainments in their ministers, and less to spiritual qualifications; and to set a higher value on scholarship and oratory, than on evangelical zeal and ability to rightly divide the word of truth.”
[/quote]
No where in this quote does Spurgeon say that he believes accurate biblical study discludes secular, academic resources. He only warns that regarding it higher than “spiritual qualifications… evangelical zeal…” etc. is “a step in the wrong direction.”
Although, I have not read the source, I believe he is saying that neither institution was correct. Both baptists and Presbyterians were wrong. The assumption is that CHRISTIAN pastors/ministers need a healthy blend of both academia and Spiritual guidance. Notice he’s speaking about Christians, here. He’s simply stating that both are essential and that churches tend to accept either/or instead of requiring BOTH .
[quote]How can a guy who started preaching at the age of 16 or 17 claim to have taken an objective look at anything? If he approached evidence with the faith that it will prove the Bible correct, that is not “an objective look.”
[/quote]
Considering you’re current trend in responses, have you actually read some of his publications with a pure, open-minded approach? Have you approached FAITH with the EVIDENCE that it will prove the Bible WRONG? Would this also not be “an objective look?”
Things for which we should give doogie credit for bringing into consideration (although he doesn’t always follow through) are: to cite sources, to thoroughly research your point, never fuel stereotypes by claiming/stating generalities or exaggerations, and never claim someone elses words as your own. The great thing is that my God does not have to be proven. However, many times Christians don’t think about the afore mentioned aspects before engaging in conversation, discussion, or debate.
I must say that I’m impressed with the intelligent and educated responses of my brothers and sisters in Christ.
Doogie, I just want you to know that all my responses are harbored in love and humility. I only mean to aid other non-believers reading this thread in understanding TRUE Christianity a little better and to avoid a view that is subjective or tainted by another’s past bad experiences. I love you man, and I’m praying for God to bless your life.
Good luck in your search for meaning and truth… I hope you find it…
[quote]doogie wrote:
There is NOTHING new and unique in the Christian story that wasn’t already found in pagan stories:
[/quote]
In no other religion or pagan story does its prophet claim that HE IS GOD… Christ did.
Doogie, is all of your evidence unbiased and objective?
just wondering…
[quote]Stace22 wrote:
Doogie, is all of your evidence unbiased and objective?
just wondering…[/quote]
I answered this right above as you were asking it probably.
[quote]Stace22 wrote:
No where in this quote does Spurgeon say that he believes accurate biblical study discludes secular, academic resources. He only warns that regarding it higher than “spiritual qualifications… evangelical zeal…” etc. is “a step in the wrong direction.”
Although, I have not read the source, I believe he is saying that neither institution was correct. Both baptists and Presbyterians were wrong. The assumption is that CHRISTIAN pastors/ministers need a healthy blend of both academia and Spiritual guidance. Notice he’s speaking about Christians, here. He’s simply stating that both are essential and that churches tend to accept either/or instead of requiring BOTH .[/quote]
Read it before commenting:
http://www.spurgeon.org/downgrd.htm
How can a guy who started preaching at the age of 16 or 17 claim to have taken an objective look at anything? If he approached evidence with the faith that it will prove the Bible correct, that is not “an objective look.”
[quote]
Considering you’re current trend in responses, have you actually read some of his publications with a pure, open-minded approach? Have you approached FAITH with the EVIDENCE that it will prove the Bible WRONG? Would this also not be “an objective look?”[/quote]
I have. I would have loved his sermons. SHort , sweet, to the point, and home in time for kickoff.
I answered this either just above or just below.
[quote]
Doogie, I just want you to know that all my responses are harbored in love and humility. I only mean to aid other non-believers reading this thread in understanding TRUE Christianity a little better and to avoid a view that is subjective or tainted by another’s past bad experiences. I love you man, and I’m praying for God to bless your life.
Good luck in your search for meaning and truth… I hope you find it…[/quote]
I have no issues with anyone having faith. It is when they say they can “prove” it that drives me crazy. That implies that people who don’t believe the same thing are stupid for ignoring “the truth”. Faith is fine with me. False claims of irrefutable proof are not.
I understand where doogie is coming from.
I agree no one has used a an unbiased source here. How can you? either you believe in a God or you don’t. It isn’t like there are alot of people who don’t care on this one.
As for research on these things I think I went out with an open mind long before I made my decision to believe again.
I went to many sites like infidels.org trying to see if my faith could stand up. in some instances it did, and in some instances it required more research. Somethings I don’t believe any more.
I am in the middle between doogie’s description, and JPbear’s description inerrent on the word of God. I do hold that the originals were inerrent.
As for the sites I use to prove my side of things. I didn’t use them exclusively. I only used them for stuff I didn’t feel like explaining, or didn’t think I could explain as well.
It is my opinion that there is a fine like that seperates the true hardline skeptic, and the true hardline believer. It really is a matter of faith. Both sides look at the same evidence, and come up with an opposite answer.
on a personally note.
Doogie I admire your willingness to look for answers. You are on my list of five most enjoyable skeptics to talk with on this site. We don’t see eye to eye, but I do find your take on things interesting.
Christianity means different things to different people. To me I think the most overlooked underlying philospophy is that it is really a searching for Truth.
1Co 15:14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation is worthless, and your faith is also worthless.
[quote]doogie wrote:
How can a guy who started preaching at the age of 16 or 17 claim to have taken an objective look at anything? If he approached evidence with the faith that it will prove the Bible correct, that is not “an objective look.”
[/quote]
Doogie,
You just mentioned in a previous post that you started questioning the bible whilst in your teens, and it seems like this “questioning” has led you to your current state of beliefs about the bible and Christianity which you are defending so strongly in this thread.
So does this mean that you were allowed to be totally objective as a teenager and yet Spurgeon was not?
[quote]doogie wrote:
Do you expect an non-believer to just say it’s not true, trust me?
[/quote]
Nope, its been weighing on my heart that most non-believers take most things Christians say as biased. They will assume the Bible is biased itself and isn’t a basis for an argurment for different reasons.
And yes, most non-believers that I’ve run into throw up this line you provided because of Christians who are very devout in their faith (but unfortunatley have not a scrap of “science” to back it up.). Most non-believers (especially these days) need more than just faith, and I can understand that because I was that way until that day I realized I was truly lost without the Lord.
Anyway:
Before I spend maybe an hour typing up some scientific facts and references for Doogie:
What is it that we’re talking about exactly? That the Bible is a true and historical document, is that it?
What is the issue in question, exactly?
[quote]bg100 wrote:
doogie wrote:
How can a guy who started preaching at the age of 16 or 17 claim to have taken an objective look at anything? If he approached evidence with the faith that it will prove the Bible correct, that is not “an objective look.”
Doogie,
You just mentioned in a previous post that you started questioning the bible whilst in your teens, and it seems like this “questioning” has led you to your current state of beliefs about the bible and Christianity which you are defending so strongly in this thread.
So does this mean that you were allowed to be totally objective as a teenager and yet Spurgeon was not?
[/quote]
I also said that I went looking again later on and came to pretty much the same conclusions.
[quote]AlphaDragon wrote:
Before I spend maybe an hour typing up some scientific facts and references for Doogie:
What is it that we’re talking about exactly? That the Bible is a true and historical document, is that it?
What is the issue in question, exactly?[/quote]
Anything you want to pick, we can go with.
This is what I was probably going to do:
–address a couple of Haney’s responses to the contradictions
–to study up on the textual critics Haney says state we are 99.9999% sure we have the full Bible (after being sure he meant “the full Bible” and not the New Testament)
–address Tacitus
–ask JPBear to provide a link for her Charles Spurgeon article so that I can see the sources (I can find many “Manuscript evidence for the New Testament” articles, just none written by Charles Spurgeon)
–Warn everyone NOT to click on the the wayofthemaster.com link JPBear provided. It will give you a migrane no matter what your beliefs are. It’s like the worst Growing Pains episode you could ever set out to write.
–Point out how sad it is that people have devoted their lives without even doing the VERY simple research it takes to find out Josephus is crap. To still be citing him as proof Jesus existed is pitiable.
–Point out to Stace22 why it is debatable
that Jesus considered himself to be god.
–Finally, ask again, for any Christian on the site to answer the Easter Challenge. I don’t care if it is cut and pasted, but there has to be something for me to respond to (beside a list of links).
I want to be clear about my motivations. First, I get pissy when people say they can “prove” the Bible. These tend to be people who only look at one side of things (because there faith is so shaky). People who think it is “telling” that I was on infidels.org. People who are willing to just take other Christian’s “word” on the many controversies rather than doing any actual research.
I’m not trying to get someone to say,
“Holy crap! I’ve wasted my life! It’s all a farce!” I would feel terrible if someone lost their faith over something I posted or linked to or cut and pasted. If anything, it would be great for me to find that faith again. It’s a terrific sensation to believe you are walking around with God on your shoulder. I just can’t stand people saying they have “proof”.
Second, I really enjoy arguing on the internet about all kinds of things because it forces me keep looking information on both sides to try and keep up my side of the issue. I would never sit down and research anything I was curious about as thoroughly as I do when someone is leading me through half the information. Sometimes I will be a prick in order to keep the other side interested/fired up (and sometimes that backfires and they quit), but I don’t really take anything online personally.
It’s nice to go back and forth with people who do more than post Bible verses to validate the Bible(yes, I’m looking at you Zeb and BigBif).
I’ve never understood what they think that will accomplish. If you have faith because of something you witnessed, more power to you. Share your tale. If you felt God move your heart, who am I to question that. But to just post verse after verse that boil down to “I believe this book because this book told me to believe it” is a bit whacky. I’m sure over the years that tactic has driven thousands of people who were on the fence about the whole Christianity thing running away as fast as possible.
Sorry, could you please clarify a few things for me?
Are you saying that in order to be a true Christian one must believe the Bible to be inerrant?
Also, why the scare quotes around Christianity, is there something wrong with that word?
Finally, are you a “true, born again follower of Christ?”
[quote]JPBear wrote:
DTLV wrote:
Scriptural inerrancy is actually a minority view within Christianity, present and (especially) past.
Of course it is, just as true, born again followers of Christ are a minority within “Christianity”.
[/quote]
[quote]doogie wrote:
AlphaDragon wrote:
Before I spend maybe an hour typing up some scientific facts and references for Doogie:
What is it that we’re talking about exactly? That the Bible is a true and historical document, is that it?
What is the issue in question, exactly?
Anything you want to pick, we can go with.
This is what I was probably going to do:
–address a couple of Haney’s responses to the contradictions
–to study up on the textual critics Haney says state we are 99.9999% sure we have the full Bible (after being sure he meant “the full Bible” and not the New Testament)
–address Tacitus
–ask JPBear to provide a link for her Charles Spurgeon article so that I can see the sources (I can find many “Manuscript evidence for the New Testament” articles, just none written by Charles Spurgeon)
–Warn everyone NOT to click on the the wayofthemaster.com link JPBear provided. It will give you a migrane no matter what your beliefs are. It’s like the worst Growing Pains episode you could ever set out to write.
–Point out how sad it is that people have devoted their lives without even doing the VERY simple research it takes to find out Josephus is crap. To still be citing him as proof Jesus existed is pitiable.
–Point out to Stace22 why it is debatable
that Jesus considered himself to be god.
–Finally, ask again, for any Christian on the site to answer the Easter Challenge. I don’t care if it is cut and pasted, but there has to be something for me to respond to (beside a list of links).
I want to be clear about my motivations. First, I get pissy when people say they can “prove” the Bible. These tend to be people who only look at one side of things (because there faith is so shaky). People who think it is “telling” that I was on infidels.org. People who are willing to just take other Christian’s “word” on the many controversies rather than doing any actual research.
I’m not trying to get someone to say,
“Holy crap! I’ve wasted my life! It’s all a farce!” I would feel terrible if someone lost their faith over something I posted or linked to or cut and pasted. If anything, it would be great for me to find that faith again. It’s a terrific sensation to believe you are walking around with God on your shoulder. I just can’t stand people saying they have “proof”.
Second, I really enjoy arguing on the internet about all kinds of things because it forces me keep looking information on both sides to try and keep up my side of the issue. I would never sit down and research anything I was curious about as thoroughly as I do when someone is leading me through half the information. Sometimes I will be a prick in order to keep the other side interested/fired up (and sometimes that backfires and they quit), but I don’t really take anything online personally.
It’s nice to go back and forth with people who do more than post Bible verses to validate the Bible(yes, I’m looking at you Zeb and BigBif).
I’ve never understood what they think that will accomplish. If you have faith because of something you witnessed, more power to you. Share your tale. If you felt God move your heart, who am I to question that. But to just post verse after verse that boil down to “I believe this book because this book told me to believe it” is a bit whacky. I’m sure over the years that tactic has driven thousands of people who were on the fence about the whole Christianity thing running away as fast as possible.
[/quote]
If you will allow it I would like to participate in this one as well. It is much easier to go over a point by point debate.
[quote]helga wrote:
Dragon wrote:
I take being a part of Gods army serious. Are lords return is soon.
Now how am I going to sleep tonight if I am worried about the world ending…but then I guess that is the whole point of that Christianity thing isnt it…Damn you people, you had to go and confuse all this shit didnt you.[/quote]
Actually the whole point is that if you are a Christian then you don?t have to worry about the end of the world.
James 4:13-17
13 Now listen, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.” 14 Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. 15 Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.” 16 As it is, you boast and brag. All such boasting is evil. 17 Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.
psalms 25 -
1 To you, O Lord, I lift up my soul; 2 in you I trust, O my God. Do not let me be put to shame, nor let my enemies triumph over me. 3 No one whose hope is in you will ever be put to shame, but they will be put to shame who are treacherous without excuse. 4 Show me your ways, O Lord, teach me your paths; 5 guide me in your truth and teach me, for you are God my Savior, and my hope is in you all day long. 6 Remember, O Lord, your great mercy and love, for they are from of old. 7 Remember not the sins of my youth and my rebellious ways; according to your love remember me, for you are good, O Lord.
Me Solomon Grundy
[quote]doogie wrote:
–ask JPBear to provide a link for her Charles Spurgeon article so that I can see the sources (I can find many “Manuscript evidence for the New Testament” articles, just none written by Charles Spurgeon)
[/quote]
Okay now I am embarrassed, the article was not Spurgeon. I assumed it was since it said “books/spurgeon/appology/chapter4”
I should have known though, since I have read a ton of Spurgeon and that obviously wasn’t him. I?m sure this info wasn?t even around during his time. I couldn’t find the source I normally refer to, so I did a quick search and then a cut and paste without really paying much attention. I apologize.
Here is the link if you are still interested:
http://www.clemson.edu/spurgeon/books/apology/Chapter4.html
Your comment about the way of the master really made me laugh! I forgot that the first time you visit that site you have to go through that little introduction thing with Kirk. I can see why you would say “worst growing pains episode ever”. There is good stuff on that site though, especially under the link “100 questions and objections”.