Comments
361 - 380 of 2,141 Comments Last updated Nov 26, 2012
FSM

Highett, Australia

#413 Sep 1, 2012
*Regarding religion*
FSM

Highett, Australia

#414 Sep 1, 2012
Allen Richards wrote:
Bulk wrap, some people have studied the Biblical languages and have the language resources to address any question.
Any question?
FSM

Highett, Australia

#415 Sep 1, 2012
Sola Scriptura wrote:
Science is a great tool for mankind when used properly. It is when science tries to become a theology book and promotes evolution over the Creation of God and then when it tries to posit life somehow came from non-life.
The scientific method is secular. It has nothing to do with theism or atheism.

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#416 Sep 1, 2012
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
The biggest problem with hearsay as it applies to the Bible is the miracles and, of course, God.
Spectacular claims require spectacular evidence.
If God provided proof, without the shadow of doubt would it make much difference? No it wouldn't. It never has before!
FSM

Highett, Australia

#417 Sep 1, 2012
The Agnostic Buddhist wrote:
Hi guys, the skeptics back with another question that you prbaly cant answer, but here goes anyways:
Considering all that we know today, how do you continue to justify your belief in Christianity? If you must cling to the idea of a deity, then would'nt Deism be a much more logical choice? Any objective study of the christian scripture is gonna lead you out of the faith...put that together with science and the many philosophical arguements against it, how do you continue?
Thanks
Logic would completely destroy faith if faith was logical, but it's not.
FSM

Highett, Australia

#418 Sep 1, 2012
Huntington Guy wrote:
If God provided proof, without the shadow of doubt would it make much difference? No it wouldn't. It never has before!
To me, yes.
FSM

Highett, Australia

#419 Sep 1, 2012
FSM wrote:
To me, yes.
Just to clarify:
1) I don't want to die. I want to live forever.
2) I want to believe that some omnipotent being is taking care of my affairs for me.
3) I want to believe that I'll see my deceased family members again.
4) I don't want my children to die.
5) I want all of the answers to my problems packaged together in one book.

but....just as much, I want the truth, whether it be comfortable or not. I know that my desires can't make all of my dreams become reality.
Big Al

Hibbing, MN

#420 Sep 1, 2012
Job wrote:
<quoted text>
There's absolutely 'nothing' written to suggest that Paul had epilepsy. He probably had an infirmity, which from what has been written, points to bad eyesight (he apparently didn't see the snake that bit him on Malta for instance). Again, nothing towards 'epilepsy'. The only reason why it makes sense to some, is because they feel a need to explain the supernatural. They're uncomfortable with the references to the supernatural, so they have to look for an explanation that if anything creates more problems than solutions.
There are historians who were eyewitnesses to the events and people they wrote about. Philo of Alexandria (20 BCE–50 CE) was a prolific Jewish philosopher, writer and historian who lived at the same time Jesus did but never mentioned him once.“Anyone” that writes about something or someone that they do not have firsthand knowledge of is writing hearsay.

The problem with hearsay is that the more times a story is repeated the more it tends to change and become inaccurate. The dictionary lists these words as synonyms for hearsay - rumor, gossip, tittle-tattle, idle talk, word of mouth and scuttlebutt. That’s why hearsay is generally considered weak evidence.
Big Al

Hibbing, MN

#421 Sep 1, 2012
Job wrote:
<quoted text>
There's absolutely 'nothing' written to suggest that Paul had epilepsy. He probably had an infirmity, which from what has been written, points to bad eyesight (he apparently didn't see the snake that bit him on Malta for instance). Again, nothing towards 'epilepsy'. The only reason why it makes sense to some, is because they feel a need to explain the supernatural. They're uncomfortable with the references to the supernatural, so they have to look for an explanation that if anything creates more problems than solutions.
To the contrary; of course the word epilepsy didn’t exist 2,000 years ago but the disease did so it would have to be identified by its signs and symptoms. Philip Lee does exactly that. Of course if your aim is simply to justify your supernatural beliefs you will blindly accept the supernatural explanation over the rational explanation. A rational person would tend to accept the rational explanation before the supernatural.
Big Al

Hibbing, MN

#422 Sep 1, 2012
Big Al wrote:
<quoted text>
There are historians who were eyewitnesses to the events and people they wrote about. Philo of Alexandria (20 BCE–50 CE) was a prolific Jewish philosopher, writer and historian who lived at the same time Jesus did but never mentioned him once.“Anyone” that writes about something or someone that they do not have firsthand knowledge of is writing hearsay.
The problem with hearsay is that the more times a story is repeated the more it tends to change and become inaccurate. The dictionary lists these words as synonyms for hearsay - rumor, gossip, tittle-tattle, idle talk, word of mouth and scuttlebutt. That’s why hearsay is generally considered weak evidence.
This post was a reply to the wrong post. It should have been a reply to Job's post #403.

“Call sign: Apache One Six”

Since: Mar 11

US 62 @ US 81

#423 Sep 1, 2012
Big Al wrote:
<quoted text>
There are historians who were eyewitnesses to the events and people they wrote about. Philo of Alexandria (20 BCE–50 CE) was a prolific Jewish philosopher, writer and historian who lived at the same time Jesus did but never mentioned him once.“Anyone” that writes about something or someone that they do not have firsthand knowledge of is writing hearsay.
How far is Alexandria from Jerusalem? Why would you expect someone in Egypt to write about a relatively unknown intinerant prophet in Jerusalem.
The problem with hearsay is that the more times a story is repeated the more it tends to change and become inaccurate. The dictionary lists these words as synonyms for hearsay - rumor, gossip, tittle-tattle, idle talk, word of mouth and scuttlebutt. That’s why hearsay is generally considered weak evidence.
Correct, if it is hearsay, something heard rather than something written down.

“To Believe is To Obey”

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#424 Sep 1, 2012
FSM wrote:
<quoted text>The only Christians who make me think about anything these days are those who are honest about their faith, both to me and to themselves. I can think of only six believers who meet that requirement, four of which I've met on topix.
Well hopefully I am one of those believers :)
Big Al

Hibbing, MN

#425 Sep 1, 2012
Allen Richards wrote:
<quoted text>
How far is Alexandria from Jerusalem? Why would you expect someone in Egypt to write about a relatively unknown intinerant prophet in Jerusalem.
<quoted text>
Correct, if it is hearsay, something heard rather than something written down.
Philo was Jew and Jews at that time were required to go to the temple in Jerusalem three times a year. Philo was very familiar with and wrote extensively about Jewish life during that time period. Jesus was certainly known by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem they were the ones that sent Jesus to Pilate. Philo wrote about the Sanhedrin.

“Call sign: Apache One Six”

Since: Mar 11

US 62 @ US 81

#426 Sep 1, 2012
Big Al wrote:
<quoted text>
Philo was Jew and Jews at that time were required to go to the temple in Jerusalem three times a year. Philo was very familiar with and wrote extensively about Jewish life during that time period. Jesus was certainly known by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem they were the ones that sent Jesus to Pilate. Philo wrote about the Sanhedrin.
Here is something I found online.

We do not have all of Philo's writings we don't know if he wrote about jesus or not.

Philo also never mentions Annas, Caiaphas, Herod Antipas, Archelaeus, Hillel, Shammai, Gamaliel I, the Sadducees, the Pharisees, John the Baptist, or any of the various millenarian and quasi-messianic figures mentioned by Josephus.

Also note that ALL of Philo's extant works except for his Flaccus and his Embassy to Gaius [Caligula] were written between 5 and 30 AD, before he ever might have heard of Jesus. The Flaccus written in the 30s simply discusses the Jewish community in Alexandria and their sufferings at the hands of the Roman governor Flaccus, and the Embassy (written about 40 AD) discusses only the embassy itself and its cause: Caligula's plan to errect a statue of himself in the Holy of Holies in Jerusalem. In neither of these would we expect to find any mention of a crucified millenarian apocalyptic rabbi and failed would-be-messiah whose followers as yet numbered only a few thousand scattered between Jerusalem, Antioch, and Damascus.

Read more: Why do the writings of Philo of Alexandria (20BCE - 50CE) fail to mention Jesus at all?| Answerbag http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2316787#ixzz2...

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#427 Sep 1, 2012
FSM wrote:
<quoted text>To me, yes.
I will not say it wouldn't, however I believe it would in the short run, but not in the long run!
Big Al

Hibbing, MN

#428 Sep 1, 2012
Allen Richards wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is something I found online.
We do not have all of Philo's writings we don't know if he wrote about jesus or not.
Philo also never mentions Annas, Caiaphas, Herod Antipas, Archelaeus, Hillel, Shammai, Gamaliel I, the Sadducees, the Pharisees, John the Baptist, or any of the various millenarian and quasi-messianic figures mentioned by Josephus.
Also note that ALL of Philo's extant works except for his Flaccus and his Embassy to Gaius [Caligula] were written between 5 and 30 AD, before he ever might have heard of Jesus. The Flaccus written in the 30s simply discusses the Jewish community in Alexandria and their sufferings at the hands of the Roman governor Flaccus, and the Embassy (written about 40 AD) discusses only the embassy itself and its cause: Caligula's plan to errect a statue of himself in the Holy of Holies in Jerusalem. In neither of these would we expect to find any mention of a crucified millenarian apocalyptic rabbi and failed would-be-messiah whose followers as yet numbered only a few thousand scattered between Jerusalem, Antioch, and Damascus.
Read more: Why do the writings of Philo of Alexandria (20BCE - 50CE) fail to mention Jesus at all?| Answerbag http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2316787#ixzz2...
I agree the absence of evidence proves nothing. I simply use Philo as an example of a historian who was a contemporary of Jesus who “could” have produced a firsthand account of Jesus. Had Philo written of a personal encounter with Jesus logic would compel me to accept it as very "reliable" evidence. In my personal opinion there is sufficient evidence for me to believe that a Jewish teacher named Yeshua lived and taught in the 1st century. However, I would not argue the point with anyone who claimed that it is not a proven fact. I am simply trying to demonstrate that the hearsay evidence provided by Tacitus, Josephus, etc. is merely a poor grade of evidence and not “reliable” evidence of the existence of Jesus.
FSM

Highett, Australia

#429 Sep 2, 2012
Deirdre222 wrote:
Well hopefully I am one of those believers :)
I hope so too, but advise you against trying to force the issue. Just be yourself and throw the apologetics nonsense out the window. Most of the unbelievers here chew through fundamentalist apologetics on a daily basis. We're what you might call 'hard soil'.:)
FSM

Highett, Australia

#430 Sep 2, 2012
Huntington Guy wrote:
I will not say it wouldn't, however I believe it would in the short run, but not in the long run!
What makes you think that?

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#431 Sep 2, 2012
Huntington Guy wrote:
<quoted text>If God provided proof, without the shadow of doubt would it make much difference? No it wouldn't. It never has before!
Personal testimony is not proof.
Job

Santa Clara, CA

#432 Sep 2, 2012
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
But that;s just your OPINION, based on what you have been trained to believe.
Wouldn't a Muslim quote appropriate Holy Qu'ran verses that would predict that Allah will send you, an unbeliever in Him, to eternal damnation?
Whhich one of you is right?
The only question that comes to mind is, who trained me? Evidentally you know something about my life that I don't know.
Basically, I think you are overlooking the possibility of a Christian believer thinking for himself.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Michael Brown was a Christian??? 38 min dollarsbill 298
Was Paul a False Apostle? (May '08) 2 hr dollarsbill 2,092
Scripture cancels Rapture lottery 2 hr dollarsbill 135
New Nightmares: ISIS Crossing Border; Sleeper C... 2 hr The truth works 2
Are World Events Pointing to End Times 2 hr Hell-Sucks 464
Cookie's Place (Oct '13) 2 hr Hell-Sucks 13,736
Is the Bible always literally true or correct? 3 hr dollarsbill 2,869
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Christian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••