22 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFYou are attempting deflection by trying to change the subject.
What I think is that you could go some way towards making your claim that 'the Bible is not evidence of God' clearer by answering the question: What evidence do you have to substantiate your belief that Jesus rose from the dead?
One rabbit hole at a time please... and I will certainly not be following you down multiple rabbit holes all at the same time.
22 Sep 14
FMF: There is no Christian faith without the Bible.Without the Bible, where do you get your Christian concept of God from? Where do you get your Christian concept of a "passage into heaven" from if not from the Bible? Where do you get your Christian belief about "God judging someone's heart"? I know enough about Christianity to be able to state categorically that there could be no Christian faith without the Bible.
Originally posted by lemon lime
That is patently false.
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by lemon limeNot so. I was repeating a question that you dodged. Your answer would go straight to the nub of what you are claiming about Christian beliefs, evidence and the Bible. Here it is again: What evidence do you have to substantiate your belief that Jesus rose from the dead?
You are attempting deflection by trying to change the subject.
22 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by lemon limeNobody has said anything of the sort. Nobody has said anything about whether people "have a Bible in their home or not". But if not from the content of the Bible, where else would someone get information about the life Jesus lived, about the purpose that Jesus had according to the fundamental tenets of Christianity, and about his supposedly supernatural or divine nature?
What is the reason for God judging someones heart if all He really needs to do is to see if they have a Bible in their home or not?
22 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFThe online dictionary I just checked seems to agree with you. I had an interesting time reading the Wikipedia page on lying. But there's an expression, when one notices one's made a mistake, "It was on Monday, no, I tell a lie, Tuesday." So there's usage like that. I don't take the word lie on its own to be that strong. There are too many minor lies for it to be that strong without qualification.
I don't think I agree with you here. "Lying" without the "deliberate" aspect is not lying. If one makes a false statement unknowingly then that is an error or misconception. I think lying has to contain an intent to deceive. I think the word "wilful" is merely an intensifier and does not add any new meaning to "lying" that is not already there.
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by lemon limeThis is an unusual view of the bible for a Christian to take, but you are entitled to it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not dismissing the Bible in regard to the importance of what it communicates or what can be learned from it. But from my perspective, my own unique and personal perspective, the Bible alone cannot get anyone in touch with God or cause anyone to believe in His existence. So no, by itself and with no other experience or consideration ...[text shortened]... evice actually doing what I was told it could do, and not just because someone told me about it.
I suppose the next questions would be: then what is your faith based upon? And, what do you think think the bible "communicates" that is "important" and what "evidence" do you have that it is important if you don't accept the evidence of the words themselves?
22 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by DeepThoughtSure. But I think the it's-got-to-be-deliberate thing is especially crucial when discussing spiritual beliefs. If a Catholic priest has lost his faith but continues to celebrate mass, for example, then I think some "lying" is going on. On the other hand, if someone genuinely believes that all mankind except for Noah and his family was exterminated deliberately by a wrathful supernatural being, or sincerely believes that God has forbidden blood transfusions, I don't think it serves any good purpose to characterize the propagation of these stories or interpretations as "lying".
The online dictionary I just checked seems to agree with you. I had an interesting time reading the Wikipedia page on lying. But there's an expression, when one notices one's made a mistake, "It was on Monday, no, I tell a lie, Tuesday." So there's usage like that.
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by divegeesterIf it's not based on a belief in Jesus Christ as portrayed in the Bible, I cannot see how lemon lime can self-identify as a Christian. The only evidence of Jesus' deeds and meaning is what is laid out in the Bible. There is no other account on which to base one's Christian faith.
I suppose the next questions would be: then what is your faith based upon?
22 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by lemon limeI'm impressed that you can ski down a slope and type at the same time.
[b]Hang on a second.
Yikes! I'm in the middle of skiing down a dangerous icy mountain slope, but okay, I'll push this little button here that makes time completely stop so I can take a close look at this...
You are saying that no book constitutes evidence.
That's right.
However a physics textbook and something like the Bible are ...[text shortened]... ught of that particular scenario before, so I'll need to mull over that awhile before answering.
Typically a physics book doesn't have a narrative.
In a court of law when a person gives evidence then their spoken words are the evidence. In some cases it's possible to give evidence in a written submission. The written submission would be considered to be evidence.
I suppose that the Bible contains testimony which is evidence. If God doesn't exist then the testimony is false. So the evidence would be false in the same way that someone could lie in court. Or the physics experiment write up could have faked results.
Does the conclusion have to be true for the evidence pointing to it to be considered evidence for it?
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by FMFI know enough about Christianity to be able to state categorically that there could be no Christian faith without the Bible.
Without the Bible, where do you get your Christian concept of God from? Where do you get your Christian concept of a "passage into heaven" from if not from the Bible? Where do you get your Christian belief about "God judging someone's heart"? I know enough about Christianity to be able to state categorically that there could be no Christian faith without the Bible.
It would be easier for an atheist to make that claim, because if God does not exist then nothing from God could ever be revealed to anyone.
Refresh my memory if you will... you told me you were not an atheist, is that right? I don't recall if you said you believed in a god (or gods) but I do recall you also saying you are a theist.
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by lemon limeSo do you believe there can be Christian faith without what Christians believe is revealed about Jesus in the Bible?
It would be easier for an atheist to make that claim [there could be no Christian faith without the Bible], because if God does not exist then nothing from God could ever be revealed to anyone.
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by lemon limeI am a theist out of instinct but I have seen no convincing evidence that God has revealed Himself explicitly or issued instructions to anyone ~ and certainly not to me. I have no religious beliefs that I seek or am able to proselytise.
Refresh my memory if you will... you told me you were not an atheist, is that right? I don't recall if you said you believed in a god (or gods) but I do recall you also saying you are a theist.
22 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by DeepThoughtIncidentally, in one of your other posts you claimed FMF wasn't a real Christian because he stopped believing. Do you therefore think that all atheists who "see the light" weren't real atheists before conversion?
Hang on a second. You are saying that no book constitutes evidence. However a physics textbook and something like the Bible are rather different things. The physics book will contain either a pile of theory, or it will contain details of experiments so that there is a description of evidence, and potentially a collection of instructions as to how to d ...[text shortened]... fore think that all atheists who "see the light" weren't real atheists before conversion?
It took me awhile before I got your meaning... first of all it's not a claim, because I literally cannot know if this is true or not. I can only form an opinion based on what I see written here, but there isn't enough information here for me to be 100% sure of anything. Like I said before, seeing something written in a book (or on computer screen) is not enough evidence for me to be absolutely sure of anything.
I don't know how to answer your question to me about atheists "seeing the light". I wasn't talking about some overarching principle of human nature, I was simply telling one (and only one) person what I thought about him. Not a claim or an accusation, because for all I know he really believes at one time he was a Christian...
Okay, sure... why not?
If I see something happening one day, then the next day I can say it didn't happen... I can say that. And who could argue with me? No one, because they weren't there. I was there, so I'm the only one who knows. So it happened, and then it didn't happen. And one day I knew that Gods exists, and the next day I knew that he doesn't exist.
Yep, uh huh, that makes perfect sense. 😕
22 Sep 14
Originally posted by divegeesterI suppose it all depends on the Christians you are accustomed to talking with. Most of the Christians I know do not have a problem understanding that it's a mistake to worship a book or a religious icon or any earthly object.
This is an unusual view of the bible for a Christian to take, but you are entitled to it.
I suppose the next questions would be: then what is your faith based upon? And, what do you think think the bible "communicates" that is "important" and what "evidence" do you have that it is important if you don't accept the evidence of the words themselves?
God is not an earthly object.