Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Divine revelation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
    Yes, but can you point out someone who explicitly applied Bayes' Theorem and became consequently wealthy?
    No, but what have I said that suggests I should be able to?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      I said there is a complete lack of historical records concerning Jesus Christ during his life, and no gospels until after 50 - 75 AD.
      Not to pick on you among others but you sum up one problem well here, to which I wanted to add some possibilities which may have already been discussed, I haven't read all the posts in the thread. Not necessarily about miracles but about lack of historical data:

      1. The most obvious would be destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, it's not feasible to think Roman soldiers would have carefully collected any records about Jesus while rampaging through the city.

      2. Damnatio Memoriae: or damnation of memory, where any public record and other traces of a person's existence are obliterated after being deemed a traitor or other extreme undesirable. Violation of which sometimes resulted in death for those who violated it by talking about it publicly. Practiced by both Romans and Jews, if applied to Jesus as a notorious traitor and pretender to the throne then it would be sufficient to explain lack of historical or official records.

      3. It's possible that Jesus was a Roman citizen like Paul and had a Roman name recorded somewhere, in addition to his Hebrew name in the Gospels. Paul was Saul. Benjamin Netanyahu was Ben Nitay. Chaim Witz is Gene Simmons. Etc.

      I've even seen some theories that Mary was actually the secret granddaughter of Antony and Cleopatra, which if true would make Jesus a legitimate political threat to not only Herod who historically sought to kill their descendants as well as Jesus in the Gospels, but to Caesar himself. Thereby a claimant to thrones of Egypt, Rome, and Israel: Pharaoh, Caesar, and Jewish Messiah. Which would actually make a lot of sense considering that Satan tempted him with kingdoms of the world: if it was ever feasible that Jesus could be tempted to go after them in a worldly political way it seems like an ideal situation. Of course we're told in the Gospels that he refused.

      Like I said, I agree there's no hard evidence for miracles, but I also think we put too much faith in recorded history, or lack thereof, to deem what's true and what isn't. Heck we don't even know who killed Kennedy, right.
      Last edited by JohnnyP; 10-22-2014, 12:57 AM. Reason: Spelling and clarification

      Comment


      • Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
        Not to pick on you among others but you sum up one problem well here, to which I wanted to add some possibilities which may have already been discussed, I haven't read all the posts in the thread. Not necessarily about miracles but about lack of historical data:

        1. The most obvious would be destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, it's not feasible to think Roman soldiers would have carefully collected any records about Jesus while rampaging through the city.

        2. Damnatio Memoriae: or damnation of memory, where any public record and other traces of a person's existence are obliterated after being deemed a traitor or other extreme undesirable. Violation of which sometimes resulted in death for those who violated it by talking about it publicly. Practiced by both Romans and Jews, if applied to Jesus as a notorious traitor and pretender to the throne then it would be sufficient to explain lack of historical or official records.

        3. It's possible that Jesus was a Roman citizen like Paul and had a Roman name recorded somewhere, in addition to his Hebrew name in the Gospels. Paul was Saul. Benjamin Netanyahu was Ben Nitay. Chaim Witz is Gene Simmons. Etc.

        I've even seen some theories that Mary was actually the secret granddaughter of Antony and Cleopatra, which if true would make Jesus a legitimate political threat to not only Herod who historically sought to kill their descendants as well as Jesus in the Gospels, but to Caesar himself. Thereby a claimant to thrones of Egypt, Rome, and Israel: Pharaoh, Caesar, and Jewish Messiah. Which would actually make a lot of sense considering that Satan tempted him with kingdoms of the world: if it was ever feasible that Jesus could be tempted to go after them in a worldly political way it seems like an ideal situation. Of course we're told in the Gospels that he refused.

        Like I said, I agree there's no hard evidence for miracles, but I also think we put too much faith in recorded history, or lack thereof, to deem what's true and what isn't. Heck we don't even know who killed Kennedy, right.
        Bringing up these possibilities, rumors and vague theories does not address the main issues at hand. Personally I do not consider much of the above having much merit. As far as 'thinking' that we put too much 'faith' in recorded history does not really understand recorded history, and yes we know 'beyond a reasonable doubt' who killed Kennedy, not withstanding it is possible that others were involved in the assassination plot, but at present there is insufficient evidence to conclude this.

        As for academic recorded history is it is more skeptical about history, miraculous and mundane events, then Christianity is about the history as portrayed in the Bible. The Bible is a narrative set in history, and not a historical record in and of itself. The problem is, what is argued here, is that miraculous events could not have a natural explanation, or any other explanation is very unlikely. Academic history does not conclude that the Resurrection and other miraculous events did not happen, but yes there are a number of alternative natural explanations for these events, as with similar events claimed to be miraculous events throughout history. The problem with those with a religious agenda is that their bias seeks justification for belief claiming that the miraculous events are historically factual with a high academic reliability that they are true. This is no more the case then any other claims of miraculous events or religions in human history. The bottom line is academic history considers these events as religious claims of miraculous events in history, and in a similar way as with Methodological Naturalism remains neutral, academic history cannot reasonably verify the relative historicity of miraculous events of any religion.
        Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-22-2014, 08:58 AM.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • I think we're still in the phase of assuming not actually knowing Oswald was alone or even responsible, but I didn't want to get into that or the miracles either. Rather that whenever the question of lacking historical evidence that Jesus existed at all is raised, my points 1-2 should be considered. 3 is more of a "what if" of course.

          More information:

          Historians sometimes use the phrase de facto damnatio memoriae when the condemnation is not official. Among those few who did suffer legal damnatio memoriae were Sejanus, who had conspired against emperor Tiberius in 31, and later Livilla, who was revealed to be his accomplice.

          It is unknown whether any damnatio memoriae was totally successful as it would not be noticeable to later historians, since, by definition, it would entail the complete and total erasure of the individual in question from the historical record.

          http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damnatio_memoriae

          Comment


          • Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
            I think we're still in the phase of assuming not actually knowing Oswald was alone or even responsible, but I didn't want to get into that or the miracles either. Rather that whenever the question of lacking historical evidence that Jesus existed at all is raised, my points 1-2 should be considered. 3 is more of a "what if" of course.
            Let's back up a bit. The issue is not whether Jesus existed or not. In general academic historians accept that a man named Jesus existed, and claimed to be the Messiah and the King of Jews. He was convicted for rebellion against Rome and Crucified in the time frame the NT describes. Historians do follow the trails of evidence, and do not necessarily require first hand witnesses to justify the existence of a person in history. The fact that there is no historical record of Jesus nor the miraculous events with many witnesses does bring to question the veracity of Christian religious claims as not possibly having a natural explanation. The question in this line of posts do involve the claim of Resurrection and the miraculous claims of Christianity. The proposal put forth was; There could not, or very likely could not be a natural explanation for these events.

            More information:

            Historians sometimes use the phrase de facto damnatio memoriae when the condemnation is not official. Among those few who did suffer legal damnatio memoriae were Sejanus, who had conspired against emperor Tiberius in 31, and later Livilla, who was revealed to be his accomplice.

            It is unknown whether any damnatio memoriae was totally successful as it would not be noticeable to later historians, since, by definition, it would entail the complete and total erasure of the individual in question from the historical record.

            http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damnatio_memoriae
            This of course is a possibility, but does not provide anything conclusive contributing to the dialogue concerning the Christian claims being the only explanation for the New Testament claims of Miraculous events including the Resurrection.
            Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-22-2014, 05:41 PM.
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              The fact that there is no historical record of Jesus nor the miraculous events with many witnesses does bring to question the veracity of Christian religious claims as not possibly having a natural explanation.
              That's kind of my point: if historical or personal records were obliterated in the destruction of Jerusalem and/or by damnatio memoriae, or not recorded at all in fear of violating it, Christian claims wouldn't be affected one way or the other.

              On the other hand divinity and miracle claims of Alexander the Great and various Caesars for example are well documented, yet same thing, their claims aren't affected one way or the other either.

              Therefore documentation made at the time of supposed events is mostly irrelevant as to establishing whether they were true or not.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                That's kind of my point: if historical or personal records were obliterated in the destruction of Jerusalem and/or by damnatio memoriae, or not recorded at all in fear of violating it, Christian claims wouldn't be affected one way or the other.
                I acknowledge the possibility here, but the issue remains, a natural explanation is possible.

                On the other hand divinity and miracle claims of Alexander the Great and various Caesars for example are well documented, yet same thing, their claims aren't affected one way or the other either.
                Ah . . . no they were not well documented at the time they occurred. Like famous or infamous persons it is common throughout human history to attribute miraculous events and nature to the posthumously' The lives of Alexander the Great and Caesar are better documented, but again academic history considers Jesus also existed and recognize some facts of his life.

                Therefore documentation made at the time of supposed events is mostly irrelevant as to establishing whether they were true or not.
                In the answers above the miraculous events nor miraculous nature is not well documented. The natural explanation remains a distinct possibility, in part because it is the rule throughout history for people to attribute a supernatural nature, and events to famous people.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  As far as change, I do not believe this could change by other means, based on my review of the writings.
                  What do you think of this opinion?

                  http://uhj.net/women-on-uhj.html

                  Is it good theological reflection or a valid interpretation of the Baha'i Holy Scriptures, faith and practice? Does it change your mind about whether or not women can serve on the Universal House of Justice without the need for a new Revelation?
                  βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                  ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                  אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    In the answers above the miraculous events nor miraculous nature is not well documented. The natural explanation remains a distinct possibility, in part because it is the rule throughout history for people to attribute a supernatural nature, and events to famous people.
                    We might agree that a natural explanation is always possible. Everyone on earth could witness any miracle, it could be documented in every way possible. You name it, giants in space playing catch with the moon, seas parting, whatever. And it could all turn out to be that we're living in a Matrix-type computer simulation as some scientists have speculated, thus an illusion of reality with a natural explanation. Or it could turn out to be they really are miracles of God.

                    So it still remains that documentation, eyewitnesses, etc. or lack thereof doesn't ultimately say anything about whether something is natural or supernatural.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                      We might agree that a natural explanation is always possible. Everyone on earth could witness any miracle, it could be documented in every way possible. You name it, giants in space playing catch with the moon, seas parting, whatever. And it could all turn out to be that we're living in a Matrix-type computer simulation as some scientists have speculated, thus an illusion of reality with a natural explanation. Or it could turn out to be they really are miracles of God.
                      Not sure of the above on how it was worded, but . . .

                      So it still remains that documentation, eyewitnesses, etc. or lack thereof doesn't ultimately say anything about whether something is natural or supernatural.
                      Sort of true, but misleading. Claims of miracles are a religious claim. For example one of the best documented religious miracles in history is the execution of the Bab in 1850, the first founded of the Baha'i Revelation. It was witness by many including a British and a Russian Envoy and recorded at the time, but nonetheless even Baha'is do not claim it a proven miracle. Miracles are simply the natural for which we do not have the knowledge to explain it. All things are natural from God's perspective.

                      Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_the_B%C3%A1b

                      The Báb and one of his companions were suspended on a wall and a large firing squad prepared to shoot. When the smoke cleared after the first firing of bullets, the Báb was missing. Reports continue by stating that the Báb was found back in his prison room finishing dictation to his secretary.[3] Other sources, which include Persian and European reports, give a variety of accounts, some in agreement with the miracle-like Bahá'í story, and some indicating a less miraculous event. All agree that he survived the first firing squad, and was killed by the second.

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      Claims of miracles such as the Resurrection should not be held up to the secular world as the 'proof' of one's belief, it is absurd, and for that matter an unrealistic assumption to the secular world as a historical Fact.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        Not sure of the above on how it was worded, but . . .
                        Well just a possible scenario to show that the wildest of seeming miracles witnessed and recorded by many can have a natural explanation.

                        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        Miracles are simply the natural for which we do not have the knowledge to explain it. All things are natural from God's perspective.
                        True, for purposes of discussion here I mean natural/non-theistic and supernatural/theistic explanations

                        Another example, if biblical angels are simply alien life forms with advanced technologies, they might enable seas parting, fire falling from the sky, etc. In that case there could still be a natural explanation for those miracles, with a theistic reason behind it.

                        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        Claims of miracles such as the Resurrection should not be held up to the secular world as the 'proof' of one's belief, it is absurd, and for that matter an unrealistic assumption to the secular world as a historical Fact.
                        I agree that arguing proof is an exercise in futility, just as I think lack of more secular records ultimately doesn't say anything about validity either way. Although I see more evidence than is often credited through fulfillment of prophecies that are historically documented, as I've discussed in eschatology and other threads.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          1st Clement DOES NOT date to the time of the apostles.

                          Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_of_Clement

                          The First Epistle of Clement (Ancient Greek: Κλήμεντος πρὸς Κορινθίους Klēmentos pros Korinthious “Clement to Corinthians”) is a letter addressed to the Christians in the city of Corinth. The letter dates from the late 1st or early 2nd century, and ranks with Didache as one of the earliest — if not the earliest — of extant Christian documents outside the canonical New Testament. As the name suggests, a Second Epistle of Clement is known; but this is a later work, not by the same author.

                          © Copyright Original Source

                          Ok. It's close enough to the apostles and the first Christians.

                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          All of the sources above are later second hand references well after the life of Christ including those by Josephus.
                          They are still records outside the gospels. They are 1st and 2nd century records. Ancient historians does not required written records during the time the events themselves occurred.

                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          Present evidence indicates that they were penned after 75 AD regardless.
                          That presupposed like not allowing Christ to predict the destruction of the temple.

                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          There is archeological evidence datable of the burning of Rome at that time.
                          There is also archeological evidences that dated to the time of first century Nazareth.

                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          Rome? Are you referring to Pompeii, As far as Pompeii is concerned there are several different ways the eruption is dated including radiometric dating. They all agree. The testimony of Pliny the Younger, Carbon 14 dating of fish waste, Potassium-Argon dating and Argon-Argon dating all agree that the eruption is 79 AD.
                          I'm referring to Mount Vesuvius. The volcano was a huge tragedy in Rome and only recorded by one commentator.. in an off-the-cuff remark long after it happened. That's because in the ancient world literacy rate was low. Radiometric dating has built-in assumptions that has been showned to be false and inaccurate.

                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          False, there are writings in tombs and other structures through much of the history of Egypt including the time of Christ. You asked a specific question as to what was recorded within 30 years of the events at the time of Christ. I gave you an answer. Of course, all events all the history of Egypt are not recorded, but yes, most of the history of Egypt was recorded at the time of the events.
                          Yes, Nazareth.
                          Yeng Vg

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by NormATive View Post
                            Ha, ha! No one can verify or refute any of that! Unless you were there? All you asked was to show some possible naturalistic explanations. I did. You can't say for sure that those things in my list didn't happen. Likewise, I cannot say that they did. Frankly, I don't really care. My worldview does not depend on the accuracy of an ancient text. You accept the resurrection stories on faith. There is no proof one way or the other.

                            Arguing for the resurrection account from one of the books of the Christian Testament is the same as lifting a section of Don Quixote to prove that Alonso Quixano REALLY DID tilt at windmills!

                            LOL!

                            NORM
                            If we are going by what the bible says in the gospel of Matthew, the evidence suggest that it was a lie and the disciples stole the body was not what happened. The Sanhedrin and authorities knew that the disciples would come get the body, that is why they send a bunch of roman soldiers to guard the tomb until the third day and secured it. A tomb with a big rock blocked the entrance with armed guards the disciples had no chance.
                            Yeng Vg

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by AkByR64 View Post
                              Radiometric dating has built-in assumptions that has been showned to be false and inaccurate.
                              State one of those assumptions.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Doug Shaver View Post
                                I used to believe that myself. Then some friends of mine, whom I was trying to lead to Christ, kept asking me why they should believe what I was telling them. I gave them the best answers I could, and they would ask me why they should believe those answers. This went on for quite some time, and it got to a point where I had no answer except "Because I say so." But I could not give my friends that answer, because I knew it was really no answer. And at the moment I realized that, I knew that my Christian beliefs were indefensible. I could not believe that something must be true for no better reason than my personal conviction that it was true.
                                So you thought you knew everything there was to know about Christianity and theism, and that if you didn't know an answer it's only because the answer didn't exist? Had quite the opinion of yourself, didn't you?

                                I'm sure if someone pushed hard enough that your belief in atheism could eventually be reduced to "Because I say so." Would you concede that atheism is also an indefensible worldview?
                                Last edited by Mountain Man; 10-27-2014, 01:14 PM.
                                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by lee_merrill, 10-24-2020, 07:58 PM
                                12 responses
                                49 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Esther, 09-27-2020, 02:01 PM
                                57 responses
                                276 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 09-15-2020, 11:19 AM
                                49 responses
                                416 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Started by shunyadragon, 09-09-2016, 03:27 PM
                                1,048 responses
                                54,211 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Started by showmeproof, 01-19-2014, 11:28 AM
                                91 responses
                                19,197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X