09 Dec 19
@moonbus saidYou have no idea, the only thing you can do is deny the text, the settings, rearrange the circumstances to something that you can accept by refusing to acknowledge the possibility it's true as written.
Sorry, I don't understand your question.
PS to previous post on fulfilment of prophecy:
The fulfilment of some prophecies has a banal (not supernatural) explanation. For example, Jesus entering Jerusalem on a mule. If we assume Jesus knew of the prophecy, that Judea's future king would enter the city on a mule, he could easily have chosen to indicate to the residents of ...[text shortened]... himself of this obvious symbolism. No supernatural power required, just a prior knowledge of the OT.
09 Dec 19
@moonbus saidLots of claims that all backup your point of view without acknowledging that you might be wrong.
@KellyJay
I responded to FMF's OP, whether the resurrection is make-or-break for Christians. I believe we have established that. You have more than adequately demonstrated that you are not willing to accept the possibility that it did not really happen. You reject any alternative non-supernatural explanation and your standard rebuttal is to quote Scripture. In the absence ...[text shortened]... man rose from dead. I expect a lot better evidence than someone's say-so, 80 years after the event.
10 Dec 19
@moonbus saidWith all due respect, Paul says it better.
If the resurrection didn't really happen, really physically, and not merely metaphorically/spiritually/allegorically, then that blasts Christianity out of the water. The resurrection is the 'proof', if you will, that the teachings attributed to Jesus are divine in origin, the certification that they are Laws Of God With Capital Letters, backed up by eternal threats, and not m ...[text shortened]... e, superstitious, magical, bits from Christianity -- including, SPOILER ALERT, the existence of God.
1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.
11 Dec 19
@whodey saidI like what Paul say a little further along.
With all due respect, Paul says it better.
1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.
1 Corinthians 17-19
And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
17 Dec 19
@moonbus saidI have inhabited the "Christian tradition" all my life and I am, I think, for most intents and purposes, a "cultural Christian" [if I understand the term correctly] who feels no need to salvage anything from the supernatural or mythological underpinnings of Christianity.
I think FMF is genuinely trying to find a way to salvage something of the Christian tradition for himself in an age which is not fertile ground for many of the presuppositions of Christian doctrine (authority-criterion of truth, for example), much less the magical details.
17 Dec 19
@pawnpaw saiddivegeester, I saw your response to Pawnpawn's comment on page 1. In fact, I think what he posted was meant as a kind of compliment.
@FMF
Spoken like a true Christian... that's my impression of FMF on all of his posts since I started reading these forums. He uses a lot of smoke and mist to hide it...
17 Dec 19
1 edit
@kellyjay saidI do acknowledge the possibility of it's truth. I then look at the preponderance of evidence to see whether the evidence supports the contention, and I find that it does not. No more so than Homer's writings are evidence that Odysseus really journeyed home for ten years after a ten year-long siege of Troy. It's an interesting contention, certainly a moving story, but not thereby true. Truth is determined by looking at evidence, not by the story itself. I read the Bible in the same way: an interesting story, but not true just because some people said so 2,000 years ago and still believe it today.
You have no idea, the only thing you can do is deny the text, the settings, rearrange the circumstances to something that you can accept by refusing to acknowledge the possibility it's true as written.
17 Dec 19
@moonbus saidI disagree with your point of view and wonder if you are only looking at that which agrees with you.
I do acknowledge the possibility of it's truth. I then look at the preponderance of evidence to see whether the evidence supports the contention, and I find that it does not. No more so than Homer's writings are evidence that Odysseus really journeyed home for ten years after a ten year-long siege of Troy. It's an interesting contention, certainly a moving story, but ...[text shortened]... ing story, but not true just because some people said so 2,000 years ago and still believe it today.
25 Dec 19
@kellyjay saidWhat's "true as written" is that he DID send someone ahead to procure a mule so that prophecy would be fulfilled.
You have no idea, the only thing you can do is deny the text, the settings, rearrange the circumstances to something that you can accept by refusing to acknowledge the possibility it's true as written.