Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Gary View Post
    Persons of other Faiths make claims of divine miracles just as numerous and just as spectacular as Christians. How is that possible? Do you have any evidence other than anecdotal evidence that Christians who follow sound doctrine are more likely to experience a miracle?
    Investigating the New Testament record made it clear enough: Those who preach a false Christ will not get any backing from God (the seven sons of Sceva as a good example). When a false doctrine is preached, the true Christ isn't being preached.

    As to anecdotal evidence - eye-witness reports are not included in the definition.

    ETA
    As to what people of other faiths may or may not be able to achieve is not related to actively preaching a false Christ. I have no doubt that adherents of at least a few other religions would be able to produce miracles.
    Last edited by tabibito; 08-19-2015, 03:07 AM.
    sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

    Comment


    • Funny thing this cartoon universe premise. As if the concept of God creating the universe is predicated on the idea of a cartoonist creating a cartoon world, instead of the other way around. GG WP.
      ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
        Funny thing this cartoon universe premise. As if the concept of God creating the universe is predicated on the idea of a cartoonist creating a cartoon world, instead of the other way around. GG WP.
        Seems to me that he thinks Calvinist (or maybe just Hyper-Calvinst) teachings are the sine qua non of all Christian teachings.



        Originally posted by Keener (via Gary)
        In framing her question for Keener, Bodkin says that “society relies so heavily on science,” which suggests that the degree to which “society” does this is excessive, as if society’s dependence on science had exceeded some tolerable limit or overstepped some invisible boundary.
        Well - that's an interesting interpretation.

        In essence, there is a tone of resentment for science from theists when they defend the notion of miracles and other religious doctrines. They see science and reliance on science as obstacles to the propagation of their faith. And rightly so. Science is essentially the systematic application of reason to some specific area of inquiry. There is no question that reason and religious faith are epistemological adversaries: reason adheres consistently to the primacy of existence, and faith grants metaphysical primacy to consciousness. There can be no compromise between the two. A position secured by a consistent application of reason has no place, need, or room for faith; and a position accepted on faith will not sustain the demands, scrutiny or challenges of reason. Faith and reason are antipodes, regardless of how strenuously religionists deny this.

        Before the Age of Reason, it was not uncommon for Christians to own up to the fact that their religious views were antithetical to reason. In his book Table Talk, church reformer Martin Luther wrote:

        Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has: it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but--more frequently than not --struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.
        Oh - well - Martin Luther said: that makes it right then. Would this be the same Martin Luther who saw fit, when he translated the Bible, to alter Ephesians 2:8 and declared, "James was an epistle of straw that had "nothing of the nature of the Gospel about it."? Despite having knowingly altered Ephesians 2:8, he then could not understand why (his version of) that verse and James 2:20-24 could not be reconciled. Small wonder his contempt for reason.
        Last edited by tabibito; 08-19-2015, 05:16 AM.
        sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

        Comment


        • Gary's blow to Keener's 2 volume work is not his own in-depth review of Keener's work, it's not even a blog post reviewing that work, it's a review of a snippet of an interview with Keener briefly speaking on skepticism of miracles.

          Yeah, using the word "fact" a dozen times (as though Keener isn't interested in the facts) really blew him out of the water.

          Comment


          • None of the apostles believed jesus had come back to life until they saw him for themselves, despite being told by eyewitnesses.

            Some reasons why eyewitnesses aren't ironclad evidences:

            http://www.innocenceproject.org/free...ons-nationwide
            http://news.sciencemag.org/policy/20...ientists-weigh

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gary View Post
              Do you believe that only the Christian god performs miracles or are the gods of other Faiths capable of performing miracles? Muslims, Hindus, and Mormons all claim many, many miracles by their gods.
              There are no other gods, only demons masquerading as such. As supernatural beings, however, they can perform miracles.
              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
              sigpic
              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                Gary's blow to Keener's 2 volume work is not his own in-depth review of Keener's work, it's not even a blog post reviewing that work, it's a review of a snippet of an interview with Keener briefly speaking on skepticism of miracles.

                Yeah, using the word "fact" a dozen times (as though Keener isn't interested in the facts) really blew him out of the water.
                Keener's book is one of claims.

                "i dont believe in miracles."

                "But the bible speaks of them."

                "Yeah, but I dont believe the bible is true. It just CLAIMS that miracles happened and I have so much scientific and personal experiences and knowledge that show miracles are extremely unlikely if not outright impossible."

                "oh, well here's this book by Craig Keener that claims more miracles, doe sthis change your mind?"

                "Why yes. Now that I have 2 volumes of miracles claims compiled by Craig Keener, I can see that miracles are indeed true. They're practically better than actually witnessing a miracle for myself."

                is that how it goes?

                I just can't overcome my skepticism. for one, there are several sects of christianity that believe miracles once happened, but now do not, so many christians also doubt modern miracle claims. and two, There are more peer reviewed works of science and medicine that should cast doubt on such claims, especially coupled with the fakes out there who con people into believing they're actually miracle workers. India is rife such people today, and we're all familiar with Benny Hen types.

                I do not reject that God could work a miracle, what I reject is that one should be expected to accept that there were miracles at the claim of someone else. When I questions a claimants testimony, I am questioning them and not God. I am questioning their account of something they claim God has done.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  There are no other gods, only demons masquerading as such. As supernatural beings, however, they can perform miracles.
                  the bible says there aren't any other gods, so there mustn't be.

                  Comment


                  • With regards to what Psstein said about the resurrection being the best explanation of the data, while we disagree on secondary details, I thoroughly agree with the primary point. I don't think any other explanation really comes close to the explanatory power of the resurrection hypothesis. We have to get into things like aliens and conspiracies and such.

                    I'm thinking with William it might be best to focus our discussion more now on the point of miracles since that seems to be the key issue.

                    Comment


                    • Looking at the thing from Gary's post, it looks more like Gary is refusing to read the books and is just reading about the books or watching videos. This is why I asked "Have you read any of Bart Ehrman's books?" I did not get a reply to this. When Hoffmeier has been recommended, he has not been read, but rather a video of Hoffmeier has been watched. To avoid reading material because it disagrees with you or because you think it will be too "time-consuming" is not the route to go if you claim to be a man of reason seeking truth. If you are seeking truth, it is worth every ounce of effort that you get it.

                      I've read Keener's book and it looks like the critic of the snippet video has the same problem as Hume has. It's in fact a kind of racism. Keener records numerous miracles, many of them with medical documentation including before and after evidence.

                      You can try approaching the actual book and going through it or stick your head in the sand and ignore it.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
                        Looking at the thing from Gary's post, it looks more like Gary is refusing to read the books and is just reading about the books or watching videos. This is why I asked "Have you read any of Bart Ehrman's books?" I did not get a reply to this. When Hoffmeier has been recommended, he has not been read, but rather a video of Hoffmeier has been watched. To avoid reading material because it disagrees with you or because you think it will be too "time-consuming" is not the route to go if you claim to be a man of reason seeking truth. If you are seeking truth, it is worth every ounce of effort that you get it.

                        I've read Keener's book and it looks like the critic of the snippet video has the same problem as Hume has. It's in fact a kind of racism. Keener records numerous miracles, many of them with medical documentation including before and after evidence.

                        You can try approaching the actual book and going through it or stick your head in the sand and ignore it.

                        it is true that we shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but with Craig Keener and the topic of miracles, no one here is disputing that people have claimed tyo see miracles. I have even posted links to miracle sightings for catholics as well as for other religions, so I dont think anyone disputes that there are people who claimed to have witnessed some.

                        As I understood it, you guys were not saying that Craig Keener's book actually worked any miracles, but instead spoke on claims of miracles. I do plan on getting to that book, but I have several books on my list of ones to get to. While I cannot speak for Gray, he may be like me, and is just unable to purchase and then read any book the moment it is suggested.

                        But since we're discussing the bible primarily, discussions on the bible should still be able to continue, without having read some other book.

                        Comment


                        • All of our discussions on the Bible hinge on miracles. It would be good to seriously discuss the philosophy of miracles as well.

                          Until you read Keener, you can also hear my interview with him.

                          http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/podcast...raigKeener.mp3

                          Comment


                          • I don't go to Jainist forums to argue with Jainists that their religion is wrong, and much of what they believe is wrong. The reason why I don't do that is because I don't know enough about Jainism to argue against it with a Jainist. I haven't read much Jainist literature, or anti-Jainist literature for that matter. I can have my own opinion about what I think is likely or not so likely about Jainism, but I'm smart enough to keep my big yap shut unless I have some good working knowledge about the topic I'm discussing. Hopping around Google, looking desperately for any sort of defeater to books I haven't even read would be an insane use of my time. Posting a review of a snippet of a video that doesn't even touch on the book is craziness. It's one thing to come to a forum and argue your point of view on things that you do know. It's also completely appropriate to come to a forum and politely ask questions about things you just don't know much about. If I were to hang out on a Jainist website I'd go there, not antagonistically, pretending I know more than they do, or getting into arguments with them when I have no ground to stand on, I'd go there with a bit of humility and a bag full of questions, and maybe once some of those questions have been answered I might attempt to pry at their beliefs a bit within reason. When people come to a forum with a chip on their shoulder, and don't take the time to actually read and understand the academic literature that's available (from both sides of the isle) they deserve not to be taken very seriously.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                              I don't go to Jainist forums to argue with Jainists that their religion is wrong, and much of what they believe is wrong. The reason why I don't do that is because I don't know enough about Jainism to argue against it with a Jainist. I haven't read much Jainist literature, or anti-Jainist literature for that matter. I can have my own opinion about what I think is likely or not so likely about Jainism, but I'm smart enough to keep my big yap shut unless I have some good working knowledge about the topic I'm discussing. Hopping around Google, looking desperately for any sort of defeater to books I haven't even read would be an insane use of my time. Posting a review of a snippet of a video that doesn't even touch on the book is craziness. It's one thing to come to a forum and argue your point of view on things that you do know. It's also completely appropriate to come to a forum and politely ask questions about things you just don't know much about. If I were to hang out on a Jainist website I'd go there, not antagonistically, pretending I know more than they do, or getting into arguments with them when I have no ground to stand on, I'd go there with a bit of humility and a bag full of questions, and maybe once some of those questions have been answered I might attempt to pry at their beliefs a bit within reason. When people come to a forum with a chip on their shoulder, and don't take the time to actually read and understand the academic literature that's available (from both sides of the isle) they deserve not to be taken very seriously.
                              Agreed entirely. Consider this. You won't see me going to the natural science section arguing against evolution. Why?

                              Because I do not study that topic. It has no interest to me. It does not matter whatsoever to me.

                              But if I wanted to argue it, what would I do? I'd go get the best books on both sides of the argument and really study them.

                              Christians around here? Many of us know the arguments for what we believe, but we also know the arguments against what we believe and we strive to know them better than the other side does.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                                I don't go to Jainist forums to argue with Jainists that their religion is wrong, and much of what they believe is wrong. The reason why I don't do that is because I don't know enough about Jainism to argue against it with a Jainist. I haven't read much Jainist literature, or anti-Jainist literature for that matter. I can have my own opinion about what I think is likely or not so likely about Jainism, but I'm smart enough to keep my big yap shut unless I have some good working knowledge about the topic I'm discussing. Hopping around Google, looking desperately for any sort of defeater to books I haven't even read would be an insane use of my time. Posting a review of a snippet of a video that doesn't even touch on the book is craziness. It's one thing to come to a forum and argue your point of view on things that you do know. It's also completely appropriate to come to a forum and politely ask questions about things you just don't know much about. If I were to hang out on a Jainist website I'd go there, not antagonistically, pretending I know more than they do, or getting into arguments with them when I have no ground to stand on, I'd go there with a bit of humility and a bag full of questions, and maybe once some of those questions have been answered I might attempt to pry at their beliefs a bit within reason. When people come to a forum with a chip on their shoulder, and don't take the time to actually read and understand the academic literature that's available (from both sides of the isle) they deserve not to be taken very seriously.
                                also good points. So I wont argue with you over Craig Keener's book. I stumbled upon a forum that was discussing the bible and the Resurrection. I am familiar with the bible and it's account of the Resurrection. I am intimately familiar a few specific brands of Christianity. I certainly have not read all, but I have read some literature regarding the bible.

                                So is there really a problem? or do you just want every passerby to ask your opinion without offering any resistance whatsoever?

                                are we measuring Book lengths to see who's right? that's not really how it works. "Well I've read this book, have you? no? well then that makes me right."

                                it may make your opinion on said book more valid, but that doesn't necessarily mean it makes your opinion the the Bible more valid, if we've all read the bible.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X