Misconceptions of Christianity

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
361

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

Can we start with some examples of modern miracles then and at least try to have something that doesn-t have an easily explained mechanism behind it?[/quote]

I missed you asking for a modern example. So I apologize for not replying.

I will be the first to tell you that I do not understand why God heals people miraculously and others he does not. Jesus did not heal everyone in Israel. Jesus could have said everyone in Israel is healed, and it would have been so, but he only healed the ones that had faith that he could heal them. They physically come to him to be healed.

I had a friend in college, still my friend by the way, made his living singing. He went in for a scope of his vocal cords because it hurt to sing. He had a bump on his vocal cord, and it was biopsied. They found it was cancer, and told him to come back in for another scope. Myself, and a group of friends prayed for him. He went back in and when they scoped him again the bump was gone. Completely gone. The doctors could not explain it. It was written of by some as a bad first scope, and that the pathologist had the wrong sample, to many other things, but my friend and I know it was a miracle.

Many Medical Doctors, MD, have stories of these types of miracles happening all the time in hospitals. MD’s have a tendency to have some tie to Religion, because they understand there is something beyond just the medication working. If it was just the medication then all patients would be healed not just a percentage.

Another miracle are the random things that happen to discover a cure of a disease. The inventor of pennicelen, my spelling is bad, used mold that grew on cheese. Who would have thought to eat the green nasty looking hair on cheese to kill bacteria?

There are many miracles that are never seen, that happen every day. Most people discount them as just coincedences, but IMO they are not. There are many miracles that happen and you do not even see them. Sometimes they save a life, sometimes they may keep a fire from happening in a house, or your child from falling down the stairs. Maybe you not dropping the weight on your throat because your spotter actually was paying attention even though you had lifted that 225 lbs many times before. Maybe you thought to drive the speed limit today and the cop was just on the other side of the hill. Miracles do not have to be big, like raising someone from the dead, but can be a small like a smile from your 6 week old child, or your child just saying I Love You out of the blue.[/quote]

So even the doctors were saying that it was down to a bad scope on the first bioposy. And they are the experts on this and obviously see this happen repeatedly yet instead of believing them, you decide it must have been God because obviously you prayed better and your friend was more worthy than the thousands of people who die each year wracked with pain from throat cancer.[/quote]

Guys, like I have said, I do not understand why God heals some and not others. Some people who pray really hard, and have faith sometimes are not healed, and their are people who are atheists that get healed. I do not know the reasoning, and will never say that I do know the reasoning.

Some of the doctors tried to explain it away as not a miracle. Some of the doctors that treated him said it was a miracle. These are doctors calling it a miracle. I beleive MDs are more predisposed to Religion and miracles because they see things that they can not explain. Just because they can not explain it and call it a miracle, does not mean that they are stupid, closed minded, or beleive in fairy tales as some like to call them. Maybe the explanation is it is a miracle. You can not discount that it could be a miracle, because it could be.

I like the explanation of the the parting of the red sea from the bible. There was a volcanoe that erupted and sent a tsunami across the mediteranian and this tsunami pulled back the red sea so the israelites could cross, and then the tsunami is the one that killed the egyptians. I just find it amazing is that it happened at that exact moment when the israelites were trying to get away from the egyptians. Coincidence or Miracle?

362

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]
There are few areas of American religious experience that has been more fraught with more abuse of the simple than this. I don’t have all the answers, but I will say I have first hand knowledge of one guy I am convinced of a certainly had his legs supernaturally healed by God. He wasn’t an amputee, but was born with a condition where his kneecaps almost faced each other inward. I don’t remember what it’s called. Anyway when he was 9, in his own church, I t’s been a long time and I don’t remember who it was now either, but somebody prayed for him.

He told me the guy squatted down in front of the seat he was sitting in and laid his legs up on his own thighs. He put his hands one on each leg by the knee and told them in the name of Jesus to be straight and they were. No sensation really, they just straightened out. He was 19 when I met him many years ago and I saw the pictures of him as a kid and it took my breath away. This is one guy I also do not believe would lie to me. Actually I knew him for over a year before he even told me and there’s no way you could know otherwise. His legs were normal.

Why doesn’t God do this more often? I don’t know for certain. Some people, many of them in my own theological tradition believe miracles ceased altogether after the birth of the church in the 1st century never to return in this age. I disagree. I will say again however as I already have that I refuse to speculate beyond what is revealed. God owes no man anything, but has nevertheless made Himself more real to me than any other fact of life. Feel free to call that what you want.[/quote]

I just noticed this (I only caught your second reply). I’m glad to hear that it (whatever “it” may have been) worked for your friend.

I can’t really comment on it any more than that since I would need more details than I think you were given.

Your last paragraph is more what I was looking for in this discussion, though - a reason why God was such a prolific miracle worker in Biblical times yet has been (as far as I can tell) inexplicably absent now that we have better tools to observe the universe, a more involved understanding of natural phenomena, and a greater importance placed upon rational, “scientific” explanations for what we experience.

It seems as though he spared no expense in the days when people were, comparatively, easier to convince (they already looked to the supernatural for many answers, didn’t they?) but is holding back in modern times where a parted sea, water-to-blood transformation, resurrection or worldwide death of a *firstborn would carry significantly more weight in showcasing his existence.

*edit

363

[quote]anonym wrote:

I just noticed this (I only caught your second reply). I’m glad to hear that it (whatever “it” may have been) worked for your friend.

I can’t really comment on it any more than that since I would need more details than I think you were given.

Your last paragraph is more what I was looking for in this discussion, though - a reason why God was such a prolific miracle worker in Biblical times yet has been (as far as I can tell) inexplicably absent now that we have better tools to observe the universe, a more involved understanding of natural phenomena, and a greater importance placed upon rational, “scientific” explanations for what we experience.

It seems as though he spared no expense in the days when people were, comparatively, easier to convince (they already looked to the supernatural for many answers, didn’t they?) but is holding back in modern times where a parted sea, water-to-blood transformation, resurrection or worldwide death of a *firstborn would carry significantly more weight in showcasing his existence.

*edit[/quote]

2000 years ago God raised Jesus from the dead. Jesus was dead then came back to life and was witnessed walking around by dozens of people. I guess we should take the words of scientists that tell us God does not exist, and not the words of average Jews that witnessed a dead person alive walking around? You want the proof of a miracle there is the greatest miracle of all. Nothing will compare to that miracle 2000 years ago, so there is no current miracle that anyone here would beleive if they do not believe in the greatest miracle of all.

Jesus said the same thing I just posted. Jesus had raised a man from the dead, Lazurus, and people said, “Jesus if you will only preform another miracle then I will beleive.” He just raised a man from the dead, what more proof do you need? Blessed are those that have not seen and yet beleive.

364

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

Can we start with some examples of modern miracles then and at least try to have something that doesn-t have an easily explained mechanism behind it?[/quote]

I missed you asking for a modern example. So I apologize for not replying.

I will be the first to tell you that I do not understand why God heals people miraculously and others he does not. Jesus did not heal everyone in Israel. Jesus could have said everyone in Israel is healed, and it would have been so, but he only healed the ones that had faith that he could heal them. They physically come to him to be healed.

I had a friend in college, still my friend by the way, made his living singing. He went in for a scope of his vocal cords because it hurt to sing. He had a bump on his vocal cord, and it was biopsied. They found it was cancer, and told him to come back in for another scope. Myself, and a group of friends prayed for him. He went back in and when they scoped him again the bump was gone. Completely gone. The doctors could not explain it. It was written of by some as a bad first scope, and that the pathologist had the wrong sample, to many other things, but my friend and I know it was a miracle.

Many Medical Doctors, MD, have stories of these types of miracles happening all the time in hospitals. MD’s have a tendency to have some tie to Religion, because they understand there is something beyond just the medication working. If it was just the medication then all patients would be healed not just a percentage.

Another miracle are the random things that happen to discover a cure of a disease. The inventor of pennicelen, my spelling is bad, used mold that grew on cheese. Who would have thought to eat the green nasty looking hair on cheese to kill bacteria?

There are many miracles that are never seen, that happen every day. Most people discount them as just coincedences, but IMO they are not. There are many miracles that happen and you do not even see them. Sometimes they save a life, sometimes they may keep a fire from happening in a house, or your child from falling down the stairs. Maybe you not dropping the weight on your throat because your spotter actually was paying attention even though you had lifted that 225 lbs many times before. Maybe you thought to drive the speed limit today and the cop was just on the other side of the hill. Miracles do not have to be big, like raising someone from the dead, but can be a small like a smile from your 6 week old child, or your child just saying I Love You out of the blue.[/quote]

So even the doctors were saying that it was down to a bad scope on the first bioposy. And they are the experts on this and obviously see this happen repeatedly yet instead of believing them, you decide it must have been God because obviously you prayed better and your friend was more worthy than the thousands of people who die each year wracked with pain from throat cancer.[/quote]

Guys, like I have said, I do not understand why God heals some and not others. Some people who pray really hard, and have faith sometimes are not healed, and their are people who are atheists that get healed. I do not know the reasoning, and will never say that I do know the reasoning.

Some of the doctors tried to explain it away as not a miracle. Some of the doctors that treated him said it was a miracle. These are doctors calling it a miracle. I beleive MDs are more predisposed to Religion and miracles because they see things that they can not explain. Just because they can not explain it and call it a miracle, does not mean that they are stupid, closed minded, or beleive in fairy tales as some like to call them. Maybe the explanation is it is a miracle. You can not discount that it could be a miracle, because it could be.

I like the explanation of the the parting of the red sea from the bible. There was a volcanoe that erupted and sent a tsunami across the mediteranian and this tsunami pulled back the red sea so the israelites could cross, and then the tsunami is the one that killed the egyptians. I just find it amazing is that it happened at that exact moment when the israelites were trying to get away from the egyptians. Coincidence or Miracle?[/quote]

Like Gibbs says, there is no such thing as coincidence.

365

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

Look, you will never see me say there is no god. There could well be a god, I find it unlikely but obviously not impossible. My view is that I am yet to encounter anything that either cannot be explained without recourse to a god or at least has no hint of an explanation that would therefore necessitate a god. Even if I were to encounter something like that, my first recourse would be to assume that either more data or more time to think was needed. The system works perfectly well without a god so why assume a god? [/quote]

Talk to a person who has seen a miracle and you will know someone who has encountered at the very least a god.
[/quote]

OK, give me an example of a miracle then.[/quote]

Typically, G-d uses miracles in Judaism to give a given person the “street credibility” that he is a representative of G-d. Example, Elisha dividing water or Moses turning a rod into a snake, etc.

Modern miracles are often more subtle.

One miracle, to me, at least, has been the continued existance of the Jewish people as a people and the re-assembly of Israel in Israel.

The scattering and near-destruction of my people has been foretold some 3,500 years ago.

Basically every major power has attempted to eliminate us: Babylonians, Pagan Romans, Papal States (with forced conversions and kidnapping of children), various pogroms in Russia, Germany, England, et al, Hitler, Stalin, modern muslim nations.

There is NOTHING special about my people. We are not bigger, stronger, faster, or more numerous.

And yet we remain while most all on that list are nothing but dust.

And not only have we remained, but have somehow managed to be at the turning points of civilization:

from Chris Columbus (yeah, his mother was Jewish, so he’s Jewish),
to Leanardo DaVinci
To ending WWI for England by inventing certain explosives
To ending WWII for the Allies by inventing nukes
To Jonas Salk (vaccines)

Even Christianity (while the theology is certainly disagreed with by Jewish people) follows the core philosophical and ethical guidelines set forth in Judaism (and, more precisely Rabbi Hillel, who first espoused the “Golden Rule — love thy neighbor as thyself” about a century before Christianity came about. (Indeed, the entire Sermon on the Mount is highly derivative of Rabbi Hillel’s teachings.)

Christianity changed the world, generally for the better.

However imperfectly, Judeo-Christian ethics are the ethics of the modern world, or at least the goal.

It staggers me that a completely insignificant semi-migratory tribe from the backwaters of Judea — has played such a vital part in civilization.

There is no rhyme or reason for us to have played the role we have played in the world, but that G-d picked up and decided that he would use this least-of-the-peoples in the world as evidence of Him.

Our existence is a miracle.

And it is also why truly evil people – Hitler, Stalin — seek to destroy Jewish people first, as they are rebelling against G-d Himself.

[/quote]

Not really a miracle though because you can explain it perfectly without recourse to the mystical.

A group of people that has a common belief and suffers a lot of hardship, they use that hardship to draw strength and also draw themselves together, supporting each other in whatever community they arrive in, lending money to start up businesses, giving emotional and physical support. Due to the wandering nature there are Jewish communities pretty much everywhere therefore there is a good chance that there will be Jewish people involved in many of modern history’s important moments.[/quote]

Yeah, but, pretty much admittedly, you are not going to see a miracle in any event, no matter how grand. [/quote]

Can we start with some examples of modern miracles then and at least try to have something that doesn-t have an easily explained mechanism behind it?[/quote]

Well you could look at all the people that have had tumors, &c. that after being prayed over disappear from x-rays, MRI’s, &c.

You could look at the Nun who was cured of Parkinson’s disease after asking John Paul II to pray for her illness.[/quote]

OK now we are talking. Please post links to where I can see the evidence of these miracles. If it’s happening a lot, that should be easy right?[/quote]

366

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Hey Brother Chris,
Why have no midgets been given full grown bodies?
Why haven’t any amputees suddenly regrown their limbs?
Why haven’t any disfigured people suddenly regained their faces?

There is no recorded history of any of that ever happening. [/quote]

Oh, you got me. You have changed my mind. I hope this was a humourous attempt at Straw-man.

367

[quote]anonym wrote:
<<< It seems as though he spared no expense in the days when people were, comparatively, easier to convince (they already looked to the supernatural for many answers, didn’t they?) but is holding back in modern times where a parted sea, water-to-blood transformation, resurrection or worldwide death of a *firstborn would carry significantly more weight in showcasing his existence. >>>[/quote]
And Christians do themselves and more importantly the gospel a disservice by failing to recognize the nearly fatal inductive weight behind this line of reasoning on the part of skeptics. Any answer that shoots very far beyond “I don’t know” is where we get into trouble by handing people like you, by which I honestly mean no particular disrespect, a shiny new set of weapons of our own invention.

I’m not saying no further explanation should be given whatsoever, but in the end, the truth is we don’t know for sure. What’s important to me is that I have no doubt there are perfectly holy and just reasons why there’s a scrap of paper stuck to a plant I can see in my front yard out the window right now to say nothing of God’s ongoing purposes for miracles.

368

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

Look, you will never see me say there is no god. There could well be a god, I find it unlikely but obviously not impossible. My view is that I am yet to encounter anything that either cannot be explained without recourse to a god or at least has no hint of an explanation that would therefore necessitate a god. Even if I were to encounter something like that, my first recourse would be to assume that either more data or more time to think was needed. The system works perfectly well without a god so why assume a god? [/quote]

Talk to a person who has seen a miracle and you will know someone who has encountered at the very least a god.
[/quote]

OK, give me an example of a miracle then.[/quote]

Typically, G-d uses miracles in Judaism to give a given person the “street credibility” that he is a representative of G-d. Example, Elisha dividing water or Moses turning a rod into a snake, etc.

Modern miracles are often more subtle.

One miracle, to me, at least, has been the continued existance of the Jewish people as a people and the re-assembly of Israel in Israel.

The scattering and near-destruction of my people has been foretold some 3,500 years ago.

Basically every major power has attempted to eliminate us: Babylonians, Pagan Romans, Papal States (with forced conversions and kidnapping of children), various pogroms in Russia, Germany, England, et al, Hitler, Stalin, modern muslim nations.

There is NOTHING special about my people. We are not bigger, stronger, faster, or more numerous.

And yet we remain while most all on that list are nothing but dust.

And not only have we remained, but have somehow managed to be at the turning points of civilization:

from Chris Columbus (yeah, his mother was Jewish, so he’s Jewish),
to Leanardo DaVinci
To ending WWI for England by inventing certain explosives
To ending WWII for the Allies by inventing nukes
To Jonas Salk (vaccines)

Even Christianity (while the theology is certainly disagreed with by Jewish people) follows the core philosophical and ethical guidelines set forth in Judaism (and, more precisely Rabbi Hillel, who first espoused the “Golden Rule — love thy neighbor as thyself” about a century before Christianity came about. (Indeed, the entire Sermon on the Mount is highly derivative of Rabbi Hillel’s teachings.)

Christianity changed the world, generally for the better.

However imperfectly, Judeo-Christian ethics are the ethics of the modern world, or at least the goal.

It staggers me that a completely insignificant semi-migratory tribe from the backwaters of Judea — has played such a vital part in civilization.

There is no rhyme or reason for us to have played the role we have played in the world, but that G-d picked up and decided that he would use this least-of-the-peoples in the world as evidence of Him.

Our existence is a miracle.

And it is also why truly evil people – Hitler, Stalin — seek to destroy Jewish people first, as they are rebelling against G-d Himself.

[/quote]

Not really a miracle though because you can explain it perfectly without recourse to the mystical.

A group of people that has a common belief and suffers a lot of hardship, they use that hardship to draw strength and also draw themselves together, supporting each other in whatever community they arrive in, lending money to start up businesses, giving emotional and physical support. Due to the wandering nature there are Jewish communities pretty much everywhere therefore there is a good chance that there will be Jewish people involved in many of modern history’s important moments.[/quote]

Yeah, but, pretty much admittedly, you are not going to see a miracle in any event, no matter how grand. [/quote]

Can we start with some examples of modern miracles then and at least try to have something that doesn-t have an easily explained mechanism behind it?[/quote]

Well you could look at all the people that have had tumors, &c. that after being prayed over disappear from x-rays, MRI’s, &c.

You could look at the Nun who was cured of Parkinson’s disease after asking John Paul II to pray for her illness.[/quote]

OK now we are talking. Please post links to where I can see the evidence of these miracles. If it’s happening a lot, that should be easy right?[/quote]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1547146/Miracle-nun-talks-of-her-Parkinsons-cure.html[/quote]

I assume you haven’t read the articles that state there was a relapse?

369

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

I just noticed this (I only caught your second reply). I’m glad to hear that it (whatever “it” may have been) worked for your friend.

I can’t really comment on it any more than that since I would need more details than I think you were given.

Your last paragraph is more what I was looking for in this discussion, though - a reason why God was such a prolific miracle worker in Biblical times yet has been (as far as I can tell) inexplicably absent now that we have better tools to observe the universe, a more involved understanding of natural phenomena, and a greater importance placed upon rational, “scientific” explanations for what we experience.

It seems as though he spared no expense in the days when people were, comparatively, easier to convince (they already looked to the supernatural for many answers, didn’t they?) but is holding back in modern times where a parted sea, water-to-blood transformation, resurrection or worldwide death of a *firstborn would carry significantly more weight in showcasing his existence.

*edit[/quote]

2000 years ago God raised Jesus from the dead. Jesus was dead then came back to life and was witnessed walking around by dozens of people. I guess we should take the words of scientists that tell us God does not exist, and not the words of average Jews that witnessed a dead person alive walking around? You want the proof of a miracle there is the greatest miracle of all. Nothing will compare to that miracle 2000 years ago, so there is no current miracle that anyone here would beleive if they do not believe in the greatest miracle of all.[/quote]

Ancient Sumerians believed that they could study the stars and animal intestines as a means of investigating disease.

In an era where knowledge of the natural world was primitive and the supernatural was routinely looked to as a means of explaining various observations, you will have to forgive me if I take the word of “average” (comparatively undereducated and highly superstitious) folk regarding dead men walking with a pinch of salt.

Nothing will compare to that miracle 2000 years ago? Arguable. But, even so, what makes those individuals so special that they were privileged with the opportunity to witness a resurrection firsthand whereas we - 2,000 years later - need to rely on a book subjected to numerous translations and dozens of interpretations over the years?

If that miracle won’t suffice, then none will? Again, arguable. But, wouldn’t even be necessary to “one-up” that miracle. Just do it again for us. It would be infinitely more useful this time due to not only medical technology and knowledge but ALSO because we have significantly better means of documenting/recording the important details for future millenia.

Besides, so what if it doesn’t convince every. single. person on the planet? For a being of unlimited power, performing such a task would take absolutely nothing. It would just be as He commands it. And yet, for zero effort, this being can’t be bothered to perform a task that would undoubtedly bring tens of thousands AT THE VERY LEAST to his side.

What if it only converted one person? One person saved from eternal damnation as the result of an action that, again, required absolutely nothing to make it so. Wouldn’t YOU choose to save a person’s soul by… doing something that is instantaneous and requires no effort?

That you presume to know that nothing can be done to change anyone’s mind is ridiculous, especially considering how many people convert to religion after years of not believing. Some just require a higher standard of proof than others.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Jesus said the same thing I just posted. Jesus had raised a man from the dead, Lazurus, and people said, “Jesus if you will only preform another miracle then I will beleive.” He just raised a man from the dead, what more proof do you need? Blessed are those that have not seen and yet beleive. [/quote]

Well, one man’s blessed is another man’s gullible, I suppose.

Why punish those who, through perhaps no fault of their own, take a stronger push to believe than others? Again, to say that there is absolutely no way to convince the nonbelievers is wrong - people convert to religion after years of atheism fairly frequently. And if comparatively smaller things can get thousands to convert, why are we to believe that HUGE things won’t/can’t?

370

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
<<< 2000 years ago God raised Jesus from the dead. Jesus was dead then came back to life and was witnessed walking around by dozens of people. I guess we should take the words of scientists that tell us God does not exist, and not the words of average Jews that witnessed a dead person alive walking around? You want the proof of a miracle there is the greatest miracle of all. Nothing will compare to that miracle 2000 years ago, so there is no current miracle that anyone here would beleive if they do not believe in the greatest miracle of all.

Jesus said the same thing I just posted. Jesus had raised a man from the dead, Lazurus, and people said, “Jesus if you will only preform another miracle then I will beleive.” He just raised a man from the dead, what more proof do you need? Blessed are those that have not seen and yet beleive. [/quote]
Good post. It also reminds me of the story Jesus told (Luke 16) of the man who went to hell and begged Abraham to send Lazarus to his family to warn them. Abraham tells him they have Moses and the prophets. The man replies that if someone were to return from the dead they would repent. Abraham tells the man that if they won’t hear Moses and the prophets (the scriptures) neither will they be persuaded even if one rise from the dead.

371

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
<<< It seems as though he spared no expense in the days when people were, comparatively, easier to convince (they already looked to the supernatural for many answers, didn’t they?) but is holding back in modern times where a parted sea, water-to-blood transformation, resurrection or worldwide death of a *firstborn would carry significantly more weight in showcasing his existence. >>>[/quote]
And Christians do themselves and more importantly the gospel a disservice by failing to recognize the nearly fatal inductive weight behind this line of reasoning on the part of skeptics. Any answer that shoots very far beyond “I don’t know” is where we get into trouble by handing people like you, by which I honestly mean no particular disrespect, a shiny new set of weapons of our own invention.

I’m not saying no further explanation should be given whatsoever, but in the end, the truth is we don’t know for sure. What’s important to me is that I have no doubt there are perfectly holy and just reasons why there’s a scrap of paper stuck to a plant I can see in my front yard out the window right now to say nothing of God’s ongoing purposes for miracles. [/quote]

This is what I was looking for. I don’t have a problem with “We don’t know”, but when people try to claim that miracles happen all the time, all over the place, and that for some reason only the believers can recognize them for what they are… well, I don’t have a “problem” with that, either, but it’s not like I am just going to purse my lips and nod stiffly before ducking out.

372

[quote]anonym wrote:
<<< What if it only converted one person? One person saved from eternal damnation as the result of an action that, again, required absolutely nothing to make it so. Wouldn’t YOU choose to save a person’s soul by… doing something that is instantaneous and requires no effort?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That you presume to know that nothing can be done to change anyone’s mind is ridiculous, especially considering how many people convert to religion after years of not believing. Some just require a higher standard of proof than others. >>>[/quote]
God is not tearfully wringing His hands praying to Himself that more people will believe. Also, regeneration from very dead to eternal life is not a religion and has nothing whatever to do with acquiescence to sufficient proof regardless of standard.

373

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
It was originally thought up by Aristotle in the form of the Prime Mover, he was looking for a logical explanation for why things move given that for something to be in motion, as far as he was aware, something had to set it in motion what he actually came up with was that energy caused motion. This idea was later developed by Plato. A thousand years or so later, thinkers of the time took the idea and applied it as a ‘logical’ proof that there is a God. It is nothing of the sort.
[/quote]
Aristotle wasn’t explaining only motion he was explaining causation. But Plato was Aristotle’s teacher, Plato wasn’t smart enough to even borrow it. It is a proof of something with God like properties. Only thing that can posses a God like quality is God.
[/quote]

It is not proof of something with godlike properties. It is proof of something that was at the time beyond the comprehension of the person doing the speculation.

Quentin Smith would be a good place to start.

[quote]

Firstly, why must I necessarily believe that and secondly, why is that in any way a proof of God. It is just a proof of something we don’t currently understand, in the same way as a few hundred years ago we didn’t understand why the Sun rose and set or the stars sparkled in the night sky.

Finally quantum fluctuations are outside of cause and effect chains because they are independent of time. The formulae work perfectly in reverse.[/quote]

Time is not a necessary component of causal relationships. There is no evidence anywhere in the universe of anything that sits outside the causal chain. Things not understood are not things uncaused.

I’ll answer more later, I just spent all night in a fucking hospital.[/quote]

Ok back to Aristotle’s cosmology. Now, Aristotle knew several things when making his argument. He knew that causes necessitate their effects. He knew as you follow the causal chain you all things have commonality with each other, that all things share properties with one anther, and that this process could not go on forever with out being a logical fallacy of begging the question. This was not an ad hoc band aid, it was carefully considered, linear logic. It literally solves an equation. As Einstein was able to postulate the existence of black holes by pure math and reason, so Aristotle was able to ‘see’ an uncaused-causer.

Quintin Smith, don’t know much about him. But what little I read, he isn’t breaking any new ground and arguing cosmology from a singularity doesn’t remove the Unmoved-mover, Uncaused- cause. I don’t see where he proves said singularity is an uncaused-causer.
In any event, I am present the arguments and not merely dropping names which I could do easily as well. So if you are going to mention a person who refuted an argument, please at least present the argument. I don’t feel like digging up obscure people’s works to try and find what they said about a certain topic.

If you do not believe that all that exists came from something that exists, the only other option is to believe that it came from that which does not exist.[/quote]

Now you have changed the request. First you ask for any book that has refuted it, I provide an author who has written several and you change to asking for the arguments. There is no way I will put things as well as the author.

At a basic level though to talk about things happening before time and space existed is already a logical fallacy therefore the argument breaks down. Also the uncaused cause is just a logical cop out. What caused the uncaused cause?

Also as I have stated above, please explain how you get form a remote uninterested prime mover to the Christian God.[/quote]

You said many books ‘refuted’ the cosmological argument I asked for the books and what the theory was that refuted it. So I never changed the request. Second, I can just say here, read Kant, Hume, Sartre, etc. Without telling what the theories are and such, but that isn’t going to do you much good. Quinton Smith did not refute the argument, he merely argued that said prime mover would be singularities rather than “God”. But he doesn’t explain where these singularities came from, if they actually exist and what gives them a creative element. Nor does he explained the laws by which the behavior would be guided and where those laws came from. I know he is stealing from String Theory to make his argument, but String Theory is incomplete. Neither does it prove something from nothing. That’s what I could gather from a skim, I haven’t had time to pour over itâ?¦He certainly makes it hard as possible to read.

Why is it fallacy to discuss what happened prior to space-time this is what most theoretical physicists do, is it not? You have to do more than just say an uncaused-cause is a cop out. Why is it a cop out? What about it, makes it fallacy? It is a strong an argument you can make, it violates no rules of logic and it’s premises cannot be disproven. That’s a pretty strong logical case. Therefore you have 2 choices if you want to prove the argument wrong. You have to prove the premises are incorrect, or the conclusion is incorrect. Not just say it, but prove it.

Where is you get the idea the Prime-Mover has the property of disinterest? You are arguing random creationism, yet there is no evidence of randomness in the universe. That does not mean randomness does not exist, it can at least in theory, but a random even its uncaused by anything and yet must cause for no reason. Random events cannot be governed by any rules or they are not random. Therefore, the argument would stated that something without cause or nature, caused everything and the rules that govern everything, for no reason what so ever?
Something that causes, with out itself being part of the causal chain, must posses something like a will to initiate with out being possessed to do so. Now getting all the way to the Christian God is a long road. Besides God is just God, Christians don’t own him. I am satisfied with showing that an intelligent existence with a will is not only possible, but likely.

374

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
It was originally thought up by Aristotle in the form of the Prime Mover, he was looking for a logical explanation for why things move given that for something to be in motion, as far as he was aware, something had to set it in motion what he actually came up with was that energy caused motion. This idea was later developed by Plato. A thousand years or so later, thinkers of the time took the idea and applied it as a ‘logical’ proof that there is a God. It is nothing of the sort.
[/quote]
Aristotle wasn’t explaining only motion he was explaining causation. But Plato was Aristotle’s teacher, Plato wasn’t smart enough to even borrow it. It is a proof of something with God like properties. Only thing that can posses a God like quality is God.
[/quote]

It is not proof of something with godlike properties. It is proof of something that was at the time beyond the comprehension of the person doing the speculation.

Quentin Smith would be a good place to start.

[quote]

Firstly, why must I necessarily believe that and secondly, why is that in any way a proof of God. It is just a proof of something we don’t currently understand, in the same way as a few hundred years ago we didn’t understand why the Sun rose and set or the stars sparkled in the night sky.

Finally quantum fluctuations are outside of cause and effect chains because they are independent of time. The formulae work perfectly in reverse.[/quote]

Time is not a necessary component of causal relationships. There is no evidence anywhere in the universe of anything that sits outside the causal chain. Things not understood are not things uncaused.

I’ll answer more later, I just spent all night in a fucking hospital.[/quote]

If time is not involved you cannot talk about what causes what. Sorry to hear you have been in the hospital, hope everything is OK with you and your family.[/quote]

Time is not a necessary component of causation. Simultaneous causation exists.

375

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]

It’s a gay argument. First of all, you cannot know it’s never happened. And even if it didn’t, the only thing it would prove is that amputees haven’t been healed.
It goes to the “God doesn’t act like I think he should therefore he must not exist” argument.

376

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
<<< What if it only converted one person? One person saved from eternal damnation as the result of an action that, again, required absolutely nothing to make it so. Wouldn’t YOU choose to save a person’s soul by… doing something that is instantaneous and requires no effort?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That you presume to know that nothing can be done to change anyone’s mind is ridiculous, especially considering how many people convert to religion after years of not believing. Some just require a higher standard of proof than others. >>>[/quote]
God is not tearfully wringing His hands praying to Himself that more people will believe. Also, regeneration from very dead to eternal life is not a religion and has nothing whatever to do with acquiescence to sufficient proof regardless of standard.[/quote]

But ISN’T He (minus the dramatics, of course)? Why else would He reveal himself to people and inspire conversion if it isn’t something He wants for one reason or another? Why else would Matthew 28:19 state “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”?

I recognize the Bible also has quotes that essentially say to not waste your time one some people, but there is a clear difference between people who express skepticism and people who express derision.

That He might simply not care (how omni-benevolent of Him) to save more people from eternal damnation would make sense if no one admitted to ever converting as a result of God revealing Himself to them by some means… but, as it stands, all we can really go on are these ambiguous situations that suggest God only chooses to convert people when it is a figurative cherry picking expedition for Him. The rest will burn for eternity for want of a single moment of clarity that is as of much effort for God to bring them as it was for Him to give everyone else.

377

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]

It’s a gay argument. First of all, you cannot know it’s never happened. And even if it didn’t, the only thing it would prove is that amputees haven’t been healed.
It goes to the “God doesn’t act like I think he should therefore he must not exist” argument.[/quote]

I’m guessing you haven’t read the rest of this thread where the deeper issue is expounded upon.

(hint: it’s not just about amputees)

378

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

Look, you will never see me say there is no god. There could well be a god, I find it unlikely but obviously not impossible. My view is that I am yet to encounter anything that either cannot be explained without recourse to a god or at least has no hint of an explanation that would therefore necessitate a god. Even if I were to encounter something like that, my first recourse would be to assume that either more data or more time to think was needed. The system works perfectly well without a god so why assume a god? [/quote]

Talk to a person who has seen a miracle and you will know someone who has encountered at the very least a god.
[/quote]

OK, give me an example of a miracle then.[/quote]

Typically, G-d uses miracles in Judaism to give a given person the “street credibility” that he is a representative of G-d. Example, Elisha dividing water or Moses turning a rod into a snake, etc.

Modern miracles are often more subtle.

One miracle, to me, at least, has been the continued existance of the Jewish people as a people and the re-assembly of Israel in Israel.

The scattering and near-destruction of my people has been foretold some 3,500 years ago.

Basically every major power has attempted to eliminate us: Babylonians, Pagan Romans, Papal States (with forced conversions and kidnapping of children), various pogroms in Russia, Germany, England, et al, Hitler, Stalin, modern muslim nations.

There is NOTHING special about my people. We are not bigger, stronger, faster, or more numerous.

And yet we remain while most all on that list are nothing but dust.

And not only have we remained, but have somehow managed to be at the turning points of civilization:

from Chris Columbus (yeah, his mother was Jewish, so he’s Jewish),
to Leanardo DaVinci
To ending WWI for England by inventing certain explosives
To ending WWII for the Allies by inventing nukes
To Jonas Salk (vaccines)

Even Christianity (while the theology is certainly disagreed with by Jewish people) follows the core philosophical and ethical guidelines set forth in Judaism (and, more precisely Rabbi Hillel, who first espoused the “Golden Rule — love thy neighbor as thyself” about a century before Christianity came about. (Indeed, the entire Sermon on the Mount is highly derivative of Rabbi Hillel’s teachings.)

Christianity changed the world, generally for the better.

However imperfectly, Judeo-Christian ethics are the ethics of the modern world, or at least the goal.

It staggers me that a completely insignificant semi-migratory tribe from the backwaters of Judea — has played such a vital part in civilization.

There is no rhyme or reason for us to have played the role we have played in the world, but that G-d picked up and decided that he would use this least-of-the-peoples in the world as evidence of Him.

Our existence is a miracle.

And it is also why truly evil people – Hitler, Stalin — seek to destroy Jewish people first, as they are rebelling against G-d Himself.

[/quote]

Not really a miracle though because you can explain it perfectly without recourse to the mystical.

A group of people that has a common belief and suffers a lot of hardship, they use that hardship to draw strength and also draw themselves together, supporting each other in whatever community they arrive in, lending money to start up businesses, giving emotional and physical support. Due to the wandering nature there are Jewish communities pretty much everywhere therefore there is a good chance that there will be Jewish people involved in many of modern history’s important moments.[/quote]

Yeah, but, pretty much admittedly, you are not going to see a miracle in any event, no matter how grand. [/quote]

Can we start with some examples of modern miracles then and at least try to have something that doesn-t have an easily explained mechanism behind it?[/quote]

Well you could look at all the people that have had tumors, &c. that after being prayed over disappear from x-rays, MRI’s, &c.

You could look at the Nun who was cured of Parkinson’s disease after asking John Paul II to pray for her illness.[/quote]

OK now we are talking. Please post links to where I can see the evidence of these miracles. If it’s happening a lot, that should be easy right?[/quote]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1547146/Miracle-nun-talks-of-her-Parkinsons-cure.html[/quote]

I assume you haven’t read the articles that state there was a relapse?

[/quote]

And this shows…

379

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
<<< It seems as though he spared no expense in the days when people were, comparatively, easier to convince (they already looked to the supernatural for many answers, didn’t they?) but is holding back in modern times where a parted sea, water-to-blood transformation, resurrection or worldwide death of a *firstborn would carry significantly more weight in showcasing his existence. >>>[/quote]
And Christians do themselves and more importantly the gospel a disservice by failing to recognize the nearly fatal inductive weight behind this line of reasoning on the part of skeptics. Any answer that shoots very far beyond “I don’t know” is where we get into trouble by handing people like you, by which I honestly mean no particular disrespect, a shiny new set of weapons of our own invention.

I’m not saying no further explanation should be given whatsoever, but in the end, the truth is we don’t know for sure. What’s important to me is that I have no doubt there are perfectly holy and just reasons why there’s a scrap of paper stuck to a plant I can see in my front yard out the window right now to say nothing of God’s ongoing purposes for miracles. [/quote]

I have come to a conclusion.

380

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

Do you believe the there is a Prime Mover?[/quote]

I guess I am agnostic on that point, as I have stated above, I see it as possible that a higher intelligence has guided things at some point in the universes history. I see it as more likely that chance and natural mechanisms have though. At a base level I do not believe in any God that in any way affects my current situation based on my actions or thoughts.

The point is ultimately a philosophical one. You look at the amazing details of quantum physics and the wonders of the cosmos and see God’s hand I just marvel at how fucking cool science is. We are ultimately talking about the same things but using different nomenclature. I am just never happy to settle for the answer ‘God did it’, I would always ask ‘how, using what mechanism, why, what made God?. etc’
[/quote]

I don’t accept the God of gaps answer either…By definition, God cannot be made, otherwise he wouldn’t be God.