Question 5 for Christians

[Libsmasher]

The claims of events that are related in the Bible happened thousands of years ago - why should we accept this as fact, when there is no evidence, and some parts of the bible even have anonymous authors?

When I've asked Christians about this before, they say you should have faith.

But telling someone to "have faith" is like telling them to "be beautiful", or "have a high IQ" - either you have faith or you don't.

 

[Pandora]

Can you give an example of events with no evidence?


I remember being told I was a stupid fool for believing in the NT or the OT for that matter, some of the things rattled off were there is not even any proof there was ever a Roman named Governor Ponchas Pilot. Also there was no high priest named Chiaphus. Both graves have been found and some of the writings of Pilot.

I was also told the NT was very flawed because Jesus spoke of washing pools the poor bathed in before entering the temple that can not possibly exist, but they dug them up a few years back and was amazed they were exactly where he said they were.

I remember hearing there is no proof there was ever even a King David, till they found an old sign with his name. Same is said for Jacob, but they found 9 rings with the seal son of Jacob. They have found Jericho, some argue they have found Sodom

It is possible some things can’t be proven yet, and it’s possible that some things can’t be proven period, but I guess I don’t know what things you mean and are they major things of importance?

Do you believe in Socrates? If you say yes then I ask why? We have zero of his own writings, only what people said about him. We never question Socrates; we never question Cleopatra but there is a lot more written about people from the Scriptures.

In the end I don’t think anyone should ask you to believe it or not believe it. It’s a very personal thing.

I have a question for you, I am very curious about. Why are your questions to Christians? Why not Muslims or Jewish people, Hindus or Buddhists? Is Christianity the only religion you are in doubt of?

 

[Libsmasher]

Can you give an example of events with no evidence?


I remember being told I was a stupid fool for believing in the NT or the OT for that matter, some of the things rattled off were there is not even any proof there was ever a Roman named Governor Ponchas Pilot. Also there was no high priest named Chiaphus. Both graves have been found and some of the writings of Pilot.

I was also told the NT was very flawed because Jesus spoke of washing pools the poor bathed in before entering the temple that can not possibly exist, but they dug them up a few years back and was amazed they were exactly where he said they were.

I remember hearing there is no proof there was ever even a King David, till they found an old sign with his name. Same is said for Jacob, but they found 9 rings with the seal son of Jacob. They have found Jericho, some argue they have found Sodom

It is possible some things can’t be proven yet, and it’s possible that some things can’t be proven period, but I guess I don’t know what things you mean and are they major things of importance?

Do you believe in Socrates? If you say yes then I ask why? We have zero of his own writings, only what people said about him. We never question Socrates; we never question Cleopatra but there is a lot more written about people from the Scriptures.

In the end I don’t think anyone should ask you to believe it or not believe it. It’s a very personal thing.

I have a question for you, I am very curious about. Why are your questions to Christians? Why not Muslims or Jewish people, Hindus or Buddhists? Is Christianity the only religion you are in doubt of?

OK, the Ten Commandments were handed to Moses on "Mount Sinai" (Exodus 19:23) or "Mount Horeb" (Deuteronomy 5:2). What is the proof this happened?

 

[bewitched]

ancient men weren't stupid. they had the same psychological and emotional struggles that we do today.
leadership back then could take advantage of those who were weaker or educate them... just as we do today.

 

[Pandora]

OK, the Ten Commandments were handed to Moses on "Mount Sinai" (Exodus 19:23) or "Mount Horeb" (Deuteronomy 5:2). What is the proof this happened?

Without finding the arc of the covenant I don’t think it’s possible to prove it. The tablets with the commandments written on them are stored in the arc.




But... if one could prove the story of Moses in other ways, it would seem acceptable to believe when they wrote about the law being given that was true also.

The Ahmose stele dating back to 1500 BC tells a story very similar to the exodus, except from the Pharaoh’s point of view.

There are many wall paintings of bearded Semites who traveled to Egypt becoming great then being oppressed then (Pharaoh’s version) driven out.

But this is like lets say evolution….it (seems) there is a lot of proof its true but I just have to many questions that I can not accept it (as presented) something like that (assuming you accept evolution) you probably wonder .. How can she not see it, its right there in front of her face! But I just see to many holes for it to be accurate. I may say my gosh how can he not see the proof of the exodus, if you look at all the proof its so easy to see.. But you see to many holes to accept it. I don’t think that makes either of us right or wrong, we just think differently. And that is what makes the world so wonderful 

We are not just mindless robots all doing the same thing, we are all led different directions and learning, thinking differently.   

 

[American First]

I apparently missed the beginning of this, however, in this time of war and turmoil, hunger and famine, is it OK to accept that some of us just BELIEVE? It gives us hope and something to cling to and those of us will never question. We don't want answers, we just want to hang on to our beliefs. Do we have to dissect everything?

 

[Pandora]

It gives us hope and something to cling to

I think Obama is sposta be the hope but that doesnt mesh to well with the clinging thing..

 

[American First]

I think Obama is sposta be the hope but that doesnt mesh to well with the clinging thing..

Better watch what you wish for, your wish just might come true.

 

[Pandora]

Better watch what you wish for, your wish just might come true.

If my wish came true, Obama would fall into Mel's hole!

 

[numinus]

The claims of events that are related in the Bible happened thousands of years ago - why should we accept this as fact, when there is no evidence, and some parts of the bible even have anonymous authors?

When I've asked Christians about this before, they say you should have faith.

But telling someone to "have faith" is like telling them to "be beautiful", or "have a high IQ" - either you have faith or you don't.

Because the facts and evidences surrounding these events are secondary to the truth it is designed to convey.

If you are looking for facts and evidences in the bible, then you are sorely missing the point.

 

[Libsmasher]

Because the facts and evidences surrounding these events are secondary to the truth it is designed to convey.

If you are looking for facts and evidences in the bible, then you are sorely missing the point.

As I said in Q1 of this series, I accept a lot of Christian moral teaching. But Christianity specifically requires you to accept its concept of God, for which there is no evidence.

 

[vyo476]

But Christianity specifically requires you to accept its concept of God, for which there is no evidence.

Fundamentalist Christianity requires acceptance of a factual God (Fundamentalists of all religions require a "one-true-literal" approach to interpretaion). All other forms of Christianity - and there are lots - tend to be looser in their interpretation.

The Westboro Baptist Church is comprised of fundamentalists, probably our most wacked out here in the States today.

Then you have Presbyterianism, or, as Robin Williams put it, "Catholic-lite."

It's all very different.

 

[numinus]

As I said in Q1 of this series, I accept a lot of Christian moral teaching. But Christianity specifically requires you to accept its concept of God, for which there is no evidence.

No.

Salvation is from grace alone. You have exactly zero capability to obtain salvation on your own.

Oh, and of course there is no evidence. Evidence proves only physical phenomena. There are tons of LOGICAL PROOF for god's existence. Try the cosmological argument for starters.

 

[Libsmasher]

No.

Salvation is from grace alone. You have exactly zero capability to obtain salvation on your own.

Wait a minute - my understanding, at least of Protestant mainline church doctrine, is that what one might call righteous non-Christians will not be "saved". One does not receive grace if one does not accept Jesus as one's Lord and Savior. Also in some Christian theologies, there is a concept of efficacious grace, thruly "graceful" grace, that seems to contradict the notion of free will in choosing betwen good and evil.

 

[numinus]

Wait a minute - my understanding, at least of Protestant mainline church doctrine, is that what one might call righteous non-Christians will not be "saved". One does not receive grace if one does not accept Jesus as one's Lord and Savior. Also in some Christian theologies, there is a concept of efficacious grace, thruly "graceful" grace, that seems to contradict the notion of free will in choosing betwen good and evil.

Churches, or organized religion, is in the business of attaining a humane society in the here and now. In this sense, churches are political associations, more than anything.

I repeat -- a moral good is its own reward. If you act according to a moral good for the purpose of 'gaining entry into heaven', then such an action was made for selfish motives and contradicts the moral good itself.

I remember asking my priest-teacher this in the 4th grade (if I recall correctly) and recieved a stern reprimand for the effort.