Do u beleave in God

[billvon 2,426]

>So Bill, you believe the Apostles KNEW they had seen a risen Christ?

I think the apostles believed in Christ strongly enough to die for him. Belief does not equal valid, correct knowledge. (If it does, as I said before, Islam is a more valid religion than Christianity.)

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Then you've got a bunch of martyrs. All that proves is that they were willing to die for a belief, not that their belief was true. Iraq and Afganistan turf out these by the truck load.

Yes, there are martyrs in most every religion, but dying for what you BELIEVE to be true is a LOT different than dying for what you KNOW to be false. Which is the case if the aspostles were willing to die for a myth they created.

I don't think he was implying that they knew it to be false (?), just that their belief was not necessarily true (even though they believed it to be true).

Why would they "believe" it to be true apart from first hand knowledge? remember these are eye-witnesses to his death and burial.

steveOrino

[steveorino 7]

Quote

>So Bill, you believe the Apostles KNEW they had seen a risen Christ?

I think the apostles believed in Christ strongly enough to die for him. Belief does not equal valid, correct knowledge. (If it does, as I said before, Islam is a more valid religion than Christianity.)

Belief in as RISEN savior or just as a teacher? I cannot imagine a first century Jew dying for a dead messiah. That is illogical as well as dying for a myth you created yourself.

steveOrino

[philh 0]

Im not suggesting they appeared out of thn air. Im just saying we dont know when they were originally written and by whom. That ignorance is a fact. You can make whatever guess you like about when they were written. But ultimatley its just a guess. Maybe they didnt mention the destruction of Jerusalem because they were written before 70ad, maybe it was becuase they didnt want people to know it was written after, maybe it was because they didn't feel it was relvant to include it in the story, (Ive seen WWII stories that end before the war ended but were written after it), maybe they did write about the destruction and it got edited out, maybe the original author intended to write about it and died and subseuent scribes didnt want to add to the work., All these maybes are obviously speculation, but thats what your conclusion is too.
THIS IS A FACT: we dont know when they were written, we dont know who wrote them .
Anything else is a guess.
Even if we accept the idea that they were written before ad 70 , your conclusion that a myth cannot arise within 35 years is completley without foundation. Why could a myhth not airse in 35 years? After Princess Diana died people saw aparationions of her within weeks. People were claiming Mohamed was the last prophet of god within 35 years of him dying, whats the difference?

People might die for what they believed to be a lie if they thought it was for some greater good. More likely people may die for a iie becuase they believe it to be the truth , that belief however can be mistaken. Lastly how do we know the contemporaies of Jesus did die as martyrs?Is it becuase it says so in the bible?

[philh 0]

"What would have convinced the Apostles that JC was resurrected apart from seeing him? "
Maybe someone saw him in a dream and it felt real, later on the stroy changed as all stories do. Since we dont have any original documents we dont even know what the original story was. Your assuming the story you read about the empty tomb actually happened, maybe that was made up later too.

[billvon 2,426]

>Belief in as RISEN savior or just as a teacher?

Belief in Christ as whoever they saw him as.

>I cannot imagine a first century Jew dying for a dead messiah. That is illogical as well as dying for a myth you created yourself.

?? I can easily believe in a twenty-first century muslim dying for a dead Muhammed, and I can believe in millions of eleventh-century christian crusaders dying for a Christ they have never even met. People will readily die for what they believe in.

[philh 0]

Why would they "believe" it to be true apart from first hand knowledge? remember these are eye-witnesses to his death and burial.

You dont know that, you are assuming that, yet again because it says so in the bible.

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Im not suggesting they appeared out of thn air. Im just saying we dont know when they were originally written and by whom. That ignorance is a fact. You can make whatever guess you like about when they were written. But ultimatley its just a guess. Maybe they didnt mention the destruction of Jerusalem because they were written before 70ad, maybe it was becuase they didnt want people to know it was written after, maybe it was because they didn't feel it was relvant to include it in the story,

A prophecy of Christ that came true was not relevant to his story?

Quote

Diana died people saw aparationions of her within weeks. People were claiming Mohamed was the last prophet of god within 35 years of him dying, whats the difference?

Historians do not say myth cannot rise within 35 years. They claim they cannot be established that quickly. Any myth about Christ that would have been started before 70 AD could have easily been refuted.

There are no alternative myth stories. When myths arise there is usully competing stories. The early Jewish writers who considered Christiany a heresy never disputed the claim of an empty tomb with "His body is here, go see for yourself" Instead they said the disciples stole it away. Yeah, right. That goes back to would the disciple die for a lie they made up.

Quote

People might die for what they believed to be a lie if they thought it was for some greater good.

And what logical goal would there be in proclaiming a risen messiah when that teaching was not in their tradition, and that type of teaching got them excommunicated from their religous community and cost them their life?

Quote

Lastly how do we know the contemporaies of Jesus did die as martyrs?Is it becuase it says so in the bible?

Many sources outside the Bible (the Bible only records the martyrdom of Stephen and James) like Fox's book of the martyrs and others record them as historical fact.

steveOrino

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Why would they "believe" it to be true apart from first hand knowledge? remember these are eye-witnesses to his death and burial.

You dont know that, you are assuming that, yet again because it says so in the bible.

So you are stating with HairyJuan the apostles were not real men, but fictional characters?

steveOrino

[steveorino 7]

Quote

>Belief in as RISEN savior or just as a teacher?

Belief in Christ as whoever they saw him as.

>I cannot imagine a first century Jew dying for a dead messiah. That is illogical as well as dying for a myth you created yourself.

?? I can easily believe in a twenty-first century muslim dying for a dead Muhammed, and I can believe in millions of eleventh-century christian crusaders dying for a Christ they have never even met. People will readily die for what they believe in.

I thought you understood my point . What does that have to do with the Apostles? The are not followers coming along years later hearing the stories. They were eye witnesses to his death. Do you believe they were willing to die for a lie they made up?

steveOrino

[billvon 2,426]

>Do you believe they were willing to die for a lie they made up?

No, I think they died for their beliefs. "Belief" generally does not equal "a lie they made up." "Belief" also does not generally equal "the literal truth." Most beliefs are somewhere in between.

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

What would have convinced the Apostles that JC was resurrected apart from seeing him? What value would they have to convince themselves JC was alive if they knew he was still in a borrowed tomb?

I'm saying the ressurection is not the first miracle Christ is supposed to have performed. I think I'm right in saying the apostles were by all accounts utterly convinced of the divinity of christ before he was nailed up, yes?

In that case, well, suppose there was an empty tomb. Suppose people reported seeing a bloke who looked like Jesus walking around. Suppose a story blossomed from there.

I'm not saying thats what happened, I honestly don't have a clue what happened, but I know this - I see examples of human deceit, gullibility, fallibility, obsession, irrationality and myriads of other faults practically every damn day. I have never seen a divine miracle.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

So you feel your not a fool because you are a christian and can quote this text.

[rant]
I think your a fool for being so gullible that you fall for this christian ideology.

I think your a fool because you cannot understand that the environment that you were born into was a christian environment - not a Muslim, Jewish, (etc.. other) religion - thus I wonder why your a christian. Was it a free choice from the religious menu here on the planet.. or was it that christianaty was what your were handed and you just went - oh - OK - better do this or go to hell. Fools just follow the heard and this is what your doing as you show no independent thought with your argument. Quoting scripture as thought it were a 'global' truth from a pedestal of 'higher than thou' when most of the planet feels your beliefs are bogus is rather cultish and mind washed behavior.

I didn't quote your complete rant because it was redundant.

It is interesting to me that you thought that one person's (new to dz.com, too) profession of faith and a reference to one of the major principles of theism deserved a hateful response such as yours. But it's always interesting to me how skeptics respond to Christians with such anger. Why don't you give us the same freedom you have-- to weigh the evidence we find necessary to weigh, to come to our own conclusions, and to engage in calm discussion about our worldview without expectation of being torn apart and called gullible, brainwashed, and stupid?

Hey, I don't know of any Christian here who is trying to convert you, or anyone else. We are defending what we believe against false accusations or representations; that is all. (Unfortunately, most skeptics don't have a correct understanding of Christianity. They think they do; but I've heard some very inaccurate assumptions being made.) I, for one, don't like my beliefs being misrepresented. You wouldn't either I'm sure. And, as Steve said, he enjoys gaining other insights and the mental workout. I have to say I do too.

As for the early "indoctrination" that some of us doubtless did have, I can only be thankful that this was the case for me. I don't care if you view this as brainwashing--- if this makes you feel better to call it that, go ahead. Everyone eventually turns 18 and moves out into the world and gets a thorough indoctrination from freedom and the other side of life. Becoming independent is a wake-up call-- everyone re-examines their philosophy and broadens their horizons. If you don't think so, you're just ignorant of the fact. Some of us are more introspective than others, and take great pains to reevaluate their belief system.

Yes, as someone who was taught early, I am thankful for early exposure to the scriptures. As Paul said to Timothy [look out, I'm gonna' quote a bible verse!!], "But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus."

"God allows hook turns."

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[steveorino 7]

Quote

I have never seen a divine miracle.

I have. Of course people on SC said it wasn't a miracle even though they could offer no reasonable explanation.

steveOrino

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

What would have convinced the Apostles that JC was resurrected apart from seeing him? What value would they have to convince themselves JC was alive if they knew he was still in a borrowed tomb?

I'm saying the ressurection is not the first miracle Christ is supposed to have performed. I think I'm right in saying the apostles were by all accounts utterly convinced of the divinity of christ before he was nailed up, yes?

In that case, well, suppose there was an empty tomb. Suppose people reported seeing a bloke who looked like Jesus walking around. Suppose a story blossomed from there.

I'm not saying thats what happened, I honestly don't have a clue what happened,...

You are right in that according to gospel accounts they saw plenty to believe he was divine. I would think that would be dashed to bits when he died though. Even the staunchest critics of Christ's divinity (such as many in the Jesus Seminar) believe the disciples saw something that radically changed them. Scripture and logic says it was something on the lines of a resurrected Christ to have changed them that much. Changed them from scared men in hiding to bold evangels for JC.

Actually there were over 500 witnesses to JC's resurection which is one of the explanations of a rapid growth of Christianity. Without the resurrection, the Apostle Paul says our faith is in vain and we are to be pitied above all men. It is illogical to believe so many Jews would follow the teachings of a dead rabbi who called himself the Messiah when their religous history did not allow for a resurrected Messiah, let alone a dead one unless they had a face to face encounter with the resurrected Christ.

steveOrino

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

It is interesting to me that you thought that one person's (new to dz.com, too) profession of faith and a reference to one of the major principles of theism deserved a hateful response such as yours. But it's always interesting to me how skeptics respond to Christians with such anger.

A profession of faith? It was a deliberate slam, how else do you interpret 'fool' (emphasised in all caps no less)?

If bigtexan wants to respond with a few 'fools' of his own then thats his prerogative. It's no more hate speech than the original post was.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

I have never seen a divine miracle.

I have. Of course people on SC said it wasn't a miracle even though they could offer no reasonable explanation.

Is everything with out a reasonable explanation a miracle of God?

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

It is interesting to me that you thought that one person's (new to dz.com, too) profession of faith and a reference to one of the major principles of theism deserved a hateful response such as yours. But it's always interesting to me how skeptics respond to Christians with such anger.

A profession of faith? It was a deliberate slam, how else do you interpret 'fool' (emphasised in all caps no less)?

If bigtexan wants to respond with a few 'fools' of his own then thats his prerogative. It's no more hate speech than the original post was.

I agree with you Jakee. (surprised?) I thought the text, while true to the Christian worldview, was meant to be a put down. Thus my response offered the question that if the same Christians who quote such passages to atheists remember the passage from Peter that says to be ready to give a reason for your faith, but do so with gentleness and respect. That type of message (fool) is always met with derision.

steveOrino

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I have never seen a divine miracle.

I have. Of course people on SC said it wasn't a miracle even though they could offer no reasonable explanation.

Is everything with out a reasonable explanation a miracle of God?

No, I was simply stating my personal experience in reply to jakee who was given his lack of personal experience as evidence.

steveOrino

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

I agree with you Jakee. (surprised?)

I'm not at all surprised. You've always shown yourself to be a very reasonable guy.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

A profession of faith? It was a deliberate slam, how else do you interpret 'fool' (emphasised in all caps no less)?

Interesting. I took his employment of "The fool hath said in his heart, 'There is no God'" to mean something along the lines of, "Of course I believe, I'm no fool!" At worst, it was only a quote. It was indirect and indefinite; one would have to assume it to be a slam.

We've never even heard from the person before; he's got no track record in the forum that would lead someone to come to that assumption. Y'all even cut ME more slack than you did that guy!

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[philh 0]

"Historians do not say myth cannot rise within 35 years. They claim they cannot be established that quickly. "
Is that Chrsitan historians you are tlaking about? what do you mean established? Certainly in the 1st century ad Christianity was not widely accpeted, it was probably a small cult, like many small cult that existed at the time.
How was the Jesus myth in 70ad more established than the Islamic myth 35 years after Muhamed died? most of Arabia had converted to Islam when Muhamed was still alive. Why did they convert if his message was not true? All the same arguments you use, can be used much more effectivley for Islam. The Muslims died for their cause, and there were a lot more Muslims at the time of Muhamed than there were Christians at the supposed time of Christ.

"The early Jewish writers who considered Christiany a heresy never disputed the claim of an empty tomb with "His body is here, go see for yourself" Instead they said the disciples stole it away."
Do you have any jewish (not Christian) texts dating back no later than 50ad or so that say this or did you just make it up?

"And what logical goal would there be in proclaiming a risen messiah when that teaching was not in their tradition, and that type of teaching got them excommunicated from their religous community and cost them their life? "
Same for Islam mate, yet again they had a new tradition and they died for their beliefs. That Does not make their beliefs true.
"
Many sources outside the Bible (the Bible only records the martyrdom of Stephen and James) like Fox's book of the martyrs and others record them as historical fact. "
Foxs book of the martyrs was written, I think, in the 16th century, is this you best source? Do you have any non Christian (contemporary of the time) sources that record the martydom of Christs dicsiples? Moreover you need also to show they died because they believed they saw the ressurection. They could have died (if they did indeed die as a marytr) becuase they believed he ws The Messiah and the resurection story got added later.
With regard to Stephen, I dont think he is a witness even in the Gosples, so his death means nothing. I dont believe the bible says why James was killed,Josephus does mention the stoning of a James but that was for breaking jewish law, that does not mean he died becuase he believed he saw the ressurection. Just because a christian dies does not mean we can automatically say they died for their beliefs or that their beliefs were true.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

I have never seen a divine miracle.

I have. Of course people on SC said it wasn't a miracle even though they could offer no reasonable explanation.

Please, refresh our memories.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I have never seen a divine miracle.

I have. Of course people on SC said it wasn't a miracle even though they could offer no reasonable explanation.

Please, refresh our memories.

In 1984 I lived in Alaska. It was bad weather one day and my wife had borrowed her dad's "land yacht" buick as our Blazer was in the shop. She put the kids by the garage door, Rashelle 5, Dustin 2 and Drew 1 and only crawling) She couldn't park the Buick in the garage (it was too long). She told the kids to stay there and she would drive the car into the garage. As she drove in she saw the door cracked and Dustin peeking out. She thought well, at least he's in the house. She felt the car starting to drive over something. Initially she thought it was a pile of clothes she had left on the garage floor for the laundry. Then a sick feeling hit her ... she was driving over her baby. Sure enough Drew crawled out through the cracked door and there he was laying there with tire tracks across him, crying. She gathered the kids up and cradled Drew in her arms as she drove to the hospital. I was told on the phone she had driven over Drew and killed him. You can imagine my horror!! When I arrived to the emergency room the nurse said "He's all right". Yeah, sure ... SHOW ME!! There was Drew, Sherry, the Doctor, and his sleeper with tire tracks over them. All Drew had on his body was a few indentations of rocks (Alaska puts small gravel and salt on the roads) from the tires. The Doctor said he's had no internal injuries, but he would most likely be bruised and sore. He never was sore and had no bruises! My wife wrote and published an article for a magazine about this experience called, "The buick, the baby and the angel"

Drew now is serving as a sgt in Afghanistan.

steveOrino

[philh 0]

r u seriosly asking us 2 believe there is a god up there looking out for one baby but for example, let 6 million die in the holcaust, or 900,000 die in the Rwandan genocide?