Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire For Christians,non-Christians & Atheists

Rene, i thank you maybe oughta be sendin him aboit $500 ta git started.

This^^^.

Some people form or adopt that belief and some are far more susceptible to doing so than others
...but belief alone is not necessarily truth. nor is what ones perceives
[when they claim to have witnessed something], necessarily the truth of the matter.

People with preconceived beliefs or just easily influenced minds are known to go calling some things miracles,
when in fact they are not.

People who watch magicians can actually start to 'believe' something appeared or disappeared or changed etc,
right before their very eyes!
easily forgetting the whole game of magic is based on ILLUSION [ an erroneous or misinterpreted perception of a sensory experience.]
then that is compounded by DELUSION [an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality]

Magicians create the illusion and then they let those in the audience create their own delusion.

A persons CREDULITY is the most powerful weapon magicians, illusionists, mentalists and preachers use.

MAGIC (otherwise known as trickery) is a powerful weapon that instead of developing critical and rational thinking in people,
screws deeply in them credulity/amazement and establishes wonder and the inexplicable into
a society already ill and rotten by subjective beliefs and other irrational and ridiculous superstitions.

This is very true and I believe it works the same in all fields including religion. Maybe even more so in religion. I was slow to rise to the picture of truth the other books brought and in some cases much more detail was shown than in the canonized version we have. When they slowly and quietly began to change words, wording, and in some cases Book names in the scriptures, including the KJV version, it was then that I began to see......." As long as mankind does not go back to the original teachings of their religion, they will be deceived and divided."............to borrow a phrase.

In whatever view you take regarding the origin of the universe you are faced with scientific/mathematical statistical improbabilities. There had to be an uncaused first cause (from where and why and how). There needs to be cosmic fine tuning to support the anthropic principles of life (there are over 30 of them), and because life has biological irreducible complexity the most simple cell must come into existence with all it's necessary components. These three must all coexist as one for life to come forth. Each one of these is statistically improbable and the three together are a mathematical impossibility to even calculate statistically.

Math and science both require an outside engagement that is greater than the force and laws of nature as we know them today. This is what we call phenomena or miracles--where all the scientific evidence and mathematical probability says something greater than the normal laws of science are at work. If God can be this agent once, He certainly can be again and again as He chooses. To deny this is to deny the evidence of both science and math. Therefore it is unscientifc to reject the evidence of science when it points to the evidence of miracles. Miracles are divine interventions with credible witnesses. Magic can be anything from occult practices to superstition but it is distinctly different from a divine miracle in its origin and application.[/quote]

This^^^, however, this truth may be too deep for many to see, as is the truth concerning the man from Galalee.
Many are limited to believing in only what they can touch, taste, see, smell or hear and would deny the existence of bacteria before the microscope invention..
Belief in God and Christ requires seeing with ones brain. Dogs and cats will never believe. Their brain justbisnt thst advanced.
Sight is information processing in an illuminated environment.
Seeing is understanding the here and now and i would add the future.

I wonder what the blind base their opinions on. They have no sight, yet they can see.

Not everyone will get it, in fact there will be many that don't.

I think you are missing the point I was making. The critics of Christianity in the days of the early Church did not deny that Jesus performed miracles, because there were too many witnesses. Because they rejected His deity, they ascribed his miracles to magic. The critics were essentially admitting that they had no way to dismiss those miracles as non-existent but they did not want to recognize them as proof of His deity--so they said He practiced magic.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ was the ultimate proof that His deeds were not sleight of hand, illusory, or occultic. Jesus was clearly a man of history as even the contemporary critics of the time admitted. They would not admit His deity so they called His works magic. However His resurrection was not so easy to dismiss so they came up with theories regarding that also. The contemporary historians record the crucifixion of Jesus but they cannot explain how the Romans lost His body. The only thing the enemies and critics needed to do was provide evidence that they had the body and that Jesus never arose.

The apostles all gave their lives for their story of the resurrection. They staked their whole message on the death and resurrection of Christ. The gospel accounts provided all the details so that it could be investigated. It was a public event that became known throughout the world.

A person can be deceived and be sincerely wrong, however it is very unlikely for people to give their lives for what they know to be a sham, because a deliberate deceiver is always governed by self interest. A deliberate deceiver will not propagate a sham when they have nothing to gain by it and everything to lose for promoting a lie. The apostles and the early Christians gave their lives for what they knew to be true and what they knew could not be credibly denied.

So let's begin with what God describes as His character--God is love and God is jealous. Contextually how do we understand these attributes. God so loved the world He gave His only Son and in another passage He loved us while we were yet sinners. That is a picture of His unconditional love for sinful man. God is jealous--but in what way is God jealous? Jealousy needs defined because it presumes jealousy about something or over something and can be a positive or negative inference. In Ex. 20:5 He is jealous in the sense that He does accept the belief in pluralism--that you can believe in Him and serve Him and yet serve other pagan gods also. The belief systems are opposed to one another. To use a more contemporary example would be to ask the US government for permission to have dual citizenship with the USA and Japan during WWII. It's not going to be allowed by either government because they are at odds. In fact the request alone would place you under suspicion. Each government was jealous of their national security and citizenship privileges. God is saying I am jealous for my people and their knowledge of truth--it is impossible to serve both me and other gods who oppose me, therefore I forbid it.

The jealousy spoken of in 1Cor. 13:4 is envy--withholding love from those whom we resent for having more than we do. There is no contradiction between any of these verses. We can use the same word to mean radically different things. Dad is proud i.e. arrogant and haughty ... or dad is proud of me for having done my best.

This is a classic example of the alleged contradictions posed by the skeptics--the contradictions are only in their own minds because they want the contradictions to be there so they can dismiss the message of the Bible. Most of these examples are easily resolved with context, common sense, and an honest desire to know the truth.

"They'll no' get him a' in a book I think
Though they write it cunningly;
No mouse of the scrolls was the Goodly Fere
But aye loved the open sea."

Here Bart demonstrates the contradictory nature of the NT Gospels and show's why Jesus is not so well attested to.

Just remember there is more evidence for the Bible than any other ancient book. When these people set up their criteria for evidence to exclude the Bible their arguments run too far because its dismisses every other source of ancient history. Proving too much simply proves the fallacies of your methodology.

So, this guy talks about the criteria for “historians” and “scientists.” Ok, by their criteria, they conclude that Jesus is not “ well attested to?” Well, surprise surprise.

I note that Bart wrote a book about the historicity of Jesus.

So, I would suppose that AS would agree with Bart in that. Jesus was indeed an historical figure. Pretty well attested to as well.

Can’t replicate His miracles by the scientific method? Wouldn’t be miracles if you could and would not testify to the God nature of Christ either. Not surprising to me at all.

I will also note that I agree with Bart in my interpretation (paraphrase) of his conclusion..... that if you believe in Jesus as a worker of miracles and perhaps as the Son of God, it is for theological reasons not the historical record of the miracles. Yep, I agree with that.

Takes more than miracles to see Jesus who He is.

This guy is an entertainer and book seller.

Simple.... God personifies and shows love to us.....to even me.

God is not jealous....of any other.....

God is jealous..... He loves me and keeps me.... he will act to protect me from harm and will not let .... others.... satan.... harm me. I like it that way.

What ancient book(s) are you referring to?

Unlike a religious follower who's obligated to mindlessly believe all the potions of a divine text, I have no requirement to accept all the positions of someone I consider a reputable source.

On the historicity of Jesus, I find Bart's evidence insufficient.

Bart's a PHD professor in Biblical Studies. He started out as a devout Christian, and the more he's studied, the more he realized a literal reading of the text is not tenable.

looks like you are the weak one.Cant talk without a filthy mouth.

You find Ehrman’s evidence insufficient.....? Lol...... Ok, you can be the judge, after all it is only you that you have to convince. Perhaps someday you will reconsider when you are confronted with conflict.

Who is this “religious follower who’s obligated to mindlessly believe.....?” Sounds like you. You are obligated to only believe the science.

There is an entire suite of reality, beings and experiences out there that you are seemingly unaware of.

But, by all means trundle on, keeping your eyes shut.

The Bible refers to those in this condition as “blind.”

Truth and sarcasm, which is which?

He will find Christians = Those who do the will of God, not those who just say they are Christians, big difference.


Mathew 21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’
23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’