Does an Omniscient Creator Lead to Fatalism?

[37818]

https://ehrmanblog.org/question-abou...d-the-gospels/

Those scholars are denying what the New Testament documents purport as true.

Russell's Celestial Teapot is an analogy intended to refute the idea that the burden of proof lies upon the skeptic to disprove a claim, whether in general or in religion. By using an intentionally absurd analogy, it draws attention to the formal logic behind the burden of proof and how it works.

Yes, referring to a known nonexistent teapot.

The patterns of evidence suggests otherwise.

The documents exist; there is no good reason to consider them based in fact.

There are real historical facts, such as Luke 3:1 and actual Jewish Passover dates.

Deities have historically demanded sacrifices, YAHWEH is no exception. Leviticus lists endless forms of sacrifices required. And of course Jesus as the sacrificial Lamb of God.

And you do not understand the "good news" or the teaching of "grace," which is unique to the Bible.


Again, the New Testament documents purport themselves to be true.

[Doug Shaver]

Those scholars are denying what the New Testament documents purport as true.

Yes. Those scholars do not presuppose that Christians like you can't be mistaken about how the documents originated.

[Tassman]

Those scholars are denying what the New Testament documents purport as true.

The majority of scholars consider there is insufficient evidence to support what the NT documents purport to be true.

Yes, referring to a known nonexistent teapot.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Russells-teapot.html

The patterns of evidence suggests otherwise.]

http://biblicalremains.com/another-b...s-of-evidence/

There are real historical facts, such as Luke 3:1 and actual Jewish Passover dates.

What does this prove about Jesus?

And you do not understand the "good news" or the teaching of "grace," which is unique to the Bible.

I think you are wrong.

Again, the New Testament documents purport themselves to be true.

Oh well if the "New Testament documents purport themselves to be true", they must be true.

[37818]

The majority of scholars consider there is insufficient evidence to support what the NT documents purport to be true.

Too bad. 100% of the genuine Christians know better.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Russells-teapot.html

But it is actually known that it is really not there. It is just an analogy.

What does this prove about Jesus?

Jesus' ministry was about two years. He began His ministry in 28CE. And was crucified during the Passover of 30CE. That year the 14th the Passover day fell on a Wednesday.

I think you are wrong.

On this, that should be easy enough to prove. So if you were to explain to someone the gospel of grace. What is it that is believed? Why would one beleive it to be true?

Oh well if the "New Testament documents purport themselves to be true", they must be true.

What can be falsified? Hay, if it could be proven definitively there is no God. . . .

[Doug Shaver]

What can be falsified?

It doesn't matter. If you don't need proof that it's true, I don't need proof that it's false.

[Tassman]

Too bad. 100% of the genuine Christians know better.

They think

Jesus' ministry was about two years. He began His ministry in 28CE. And was crucified during the Passover of 30CE. That year the 14th the Passover day fell on a Wednesday.

On this, that should be easy enough to prove. So if you were to explain to someone the gospel of grace. What is it that is believed? Why would one beleive it to be true?

One would not

What can be falsified? Hay, if it could be proven definitively there is no God. . . .

Why would one assume the existence of a deity in the first place?

[37818]

They think

Well. You with no good reason do not believe in God. God is the only reason Christians can know better. Genuine Christians knowing God. If one really knows someone how can one not?


What peice of ancient history is more sound?

One would not

Any deity in need of "existence" is not God. God being the "is." By which there is existence, God being the uncaused Existence.

Why would one assume the existence of a deity in the first place?

Again, any deity in need of existence is not the Existence, that is, God.

[Doug Shaver]

What peice of ancient history is more sound?

All the pieces that are done by real historians. Real historians don't evaluate their work by its conformity with religious dogma.

[37818]

All the pieces that are done by real historians. Real historians don't evaluate their work by its conformity with religious dogma.

What ancient written document is more reliable than the Biblical documents?

[Doug Shaver]

What ancient written document is more reliable than the Biblical documents?

In your judgment? None, I'm sure. And your judgment is the only one that matters, right?

[Tassman]

Well. You with no good reason do not believe in God.

God is the only reason Christians can know better. Genuine Christians knowing God. If one really knows someone how can one not?

All beliefs in all religions are delusional. There is no substantive evidence to argue otherwise.

What peice of ancient history is more sound?

any religion beyond the fact that some people believe in it for random reasons with no substantiated facts available.

Any deity in need of "existence" is not God. God being the "is." By which there is existence, God being the uncaused Existence.

Again, any deity in need of existence is not the Existence, that is, God.

The only alternative is non-existence.

[37818]

The default position is uncaused Existence. And the identity of God is uncaused Existence. Atheism is denial.

All beliefs in all religions are delusional. There is no substantive evidence to argue otherwise.

Truth is contingent on reality. Atheism is rooted in denial. Delusions are beliefs not in reality.

any religion beyond the fact that some people believe in it for random reasons with no substantiated facts available.

Prove that for Biblical Judaism and Biblical Christianity.


The God is the God of the Hebrews is the Self Existent One who reveals Himself. His Name identifies who He is.

The only alternative is non-existence.

But the universe is in Existence.

[Doug Shaver]

Prove that for Biblical Judaism and Biblical Christianity.

You agree that it's true for all other religions. You're claiming an exception. You need to prove the exception.

[Tassman]

The default position is uncaused Existence. And the identity of God is uncaused Existence. Atheism is denial.

Truth is contingent on reality. Atheism is rooted in denial. Delusions are beliefs not in reality.

Prove that for Biblical Judaism and Biblical Christianity.

I suggest you apply the same argument you use to discount other religions.

The God is the God of the Hebrews is the Self Existent One who reveals Himself. His Name identifies who He is.

The God of the Hebrews is a man-made myth deriving from the Bronze Age, there is no good reason to think it is more than that.

But the universe is in Existence.

By which you mean "IN" your deity, presumably. Why would anyone believe that?

[Roy]

What ancient written document is more reliable than the Biblical documents?

Pliny's account of the eruption of Vesuvius.