Christianity Changes View

[Ambrose]

Oh I completely agree with that

Yeah the trick is getting him to try it and agree.

In the words of King David:

"Taste and see that the Lord is good."

Yes he has been a "Christian" that prays and goes to church and believes and stuff. But based on what he has told me I am leaning towards a non-bible based teaching.

 

[farouk]

It's often been said that the Bible is self-authenticating.

 

[Ambrose]

It's often been said that the Bible is self-authenticating.

As it definitely may do so, (No personal experience there. None necessary.) but for it to do that he has to take the dive and taste it himself. Just like King David put it

 

[Grazer]

Yeah the trick is getting him to try it and agree.

In the words of King David:

"Taste and see that the Lord is good."

Yes he has been a "Christian" that prays and goes to church and believes and stuff. But based on what he has told me I am leaning towards a non-bible based teaching.

The type of church you go to and type of Christian you meet has a massive impact on peoples perception of the Christian faith. I won't lie, in the early stages of being a Christian I seemed to be struggling with things more than before and it didn't go un-noticed.

It was the comment that "faith is believing without evidence" that interested me.

I think sometimes there is a tendency for Christians to forget that there are legitimate questions surrounding the accuracy and validity of the Bible and the Christian faith, we just take it for granted.

 

[Ambrose]

The type of church you go to and type of Christian you meet has a massive impact on peoples perception of the Christian faith. I won't lie, in the early stages of being a Christian I seemed to be struggling with things more than before and it didn't go un-noticed.

It was the comment that "faith is believing without evidence" that interested me.

Well, While you are a believer in Christ The Lord does ask Child like faith from you! Its his ultimate gateway. I STILL haven't been able to open up that channel. But I am beginning my journey to a child like faith. When I experience that I reckon there will be no turning back.

 

[farouk]

Grazer: Anyway I was thinking of Hebrews 11:"[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Faith itself is the evidence, as enlightened by the Word.
[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[Grazer]

Grazer: Anyway I was thinking of Hebrews 11:"[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Faith itself is the evidence, as enlightened by the Word.
[/FONT][/FONT]

Faith is in response to truth and reality. I trust God, I don't need any more evidence for that. But faith is evidence? Who's faith?

Btw I love that verse, it's the tagline for my website

 

[Atothetheist]

Atothetheist

Asking if the science facts you speak of have changed in the last 100 years? even the last fifty..... in the last ten.... We see the changes of facts in the science of global warming. We see the differences of opinions of the science minds.

1956 my science text book had a picture of dino foot prints and mans foot prints together.... Some how now that science fact is not a fact?

Dont get me wrong i think learning grows and changes my problem is the science field represents themselves as factual with each change... even with simple stuff like coffee is bad coffee is not bad

Evidence is factual fact are hard and cold they are what they are.... What the science world calls evidence today may not be the evidence of tomorrow.....


Gods Word does not change, that is not to say we dont mess it up we seem to try our best to get in His way....

You wish not to believe in God well that is your choice man tends to choose self over God . When a Christian or Scripture points out this or that is sinful, that is not being judgmental it is just a statement of unchanging fact. There is not a man alive who can place a judgement on another to condemn them to hell. This cry of judgement is a cover up...

The Crossroad is laid out for man. Eternity is long time, some will choose to live in today only.

In the science of history we know Jesus walked this earth. We know Sodom was a real place that burnt.

That's the point. Science changes. It is allowed to. There is no such thing as Scientific fact. Science by defintion CAN'T prove something within a one hundred degree of certainty. Science thought humans and dinosaurs roamed the earth once. Science gathered new evidence, and a lot of it, that support that they weren't together. Just like in the old days when people, even scientific people, thought the earth was flat!

Because science changes, or the better word would be improves, there is a certain amount credibility given to it. You use sceintific things everyday. Computers are one, your clothes are one. Vaccinations are one.

The bible is NOT evidence of your God, and I only say this because somebody above mentioned it. Is the book the tales of Illiad proof of multiple gods? No. Just because a book says so, doesn't mean it is real. Anecdotal evidence is in the Similar catagory. Muslims have experiences of their God, and so do Hindus. They also have their own miricles.

For the record, do you think homosexuality is bad? Do you think eating shellfish is bad? What about not beliveing. If you answer any of those questions AT ALL you are judgemental. It doesn't matter if you say that you are Judging based on God's laws. You are still Judgemental.

Sorry, but that is a lie. We have absolutely no evidence for the existiance of Jesus outside the bible besides a few refferances that have proven to be forgeries.

They have not found Sodom. They do not know it was burned down. Show me a source of your information.

 

[Atothetheist]

It's often been said that the Bible is self-authenticating.

That is circular reasoning, and it is wrong. The bible has been altered by many people. And we know this by comparing the earliest documents we have. (we have no originals.) by the later documents. The earliest document of Mark, has no RESSUERECTION of Jesus.

The story of the woman brought up for aldutery and Jesus saves her In John. Another later addition.

 

[Grazer]

Do you think believing in God is wrong? If you answer that question you are being judgemental.

We all use judgement to discern right from wrong, you can't not. Seems we're bordering on all morality being subjective and/or we can't say someone or something is wrong.

Re: bible as evidence, I agree just because it says so doesn't mean it's true. I made the comment in response to a Christian saying we don't need evidence.

 

[Atothetheist]

Do you think believing in God is wrong? If you answer that question you are being judgemental.

We all use judgement to discern right from wrong, you can't not. Seems we're bordering on all morality being subjective and/or we can't say someone or something is wrong.

Re: bible as evidence, I agree just because it says so doesn't mean it's true. I made the comment in response to a Christian saying we don't need evidence.

I never made the claim that I am not judgemental.

But I don't judge on precepts of a Ancient Deity that, if you read the bible, made shellfish an abomination to eat.

 

[reba]

For the record, do you think homosexuality is bad? Do you think eating shellfish is bad? What about not beliveing. If you answer any of those questions AT ALL you are judgemental. It doesn't matter if you say that you are Judging based on God's laws. You are still Judgemental.

Yes to the above.. except the shell fish.And you are judging me to be judgmental. So we are more a like then one might think...

 

[Atothetheist]

Back the viewpoint of christianity. Regardless if you stand it up to the scientific method. Christianity would be shot down, it is only natural. I can't accept christian doctrine because it relys on faith.

 

[Atothetheist]

Yes to the above.. except the shell fish.And you are judging me to be judgmental. So we are more a like then one might think...

Again, never made then claim that I wasn't judgemental.

 

[Grazer]

That is circular reasoning, and it is wrong. The bible has been altered by many people. And we know this by comparing the earliest documents we have. (we have no originals.) by the later documents. The earliest document of Mark, has no RESSUERECTION of Jesus.

The story of the woman brought up for aldutery and Jesus saves her In John. Another later addition.

There is some dispute over Mark however, you won't find many historians or scholars agreeing with you that the Bible has been significantly altered. Sir Fredrick Kenyon, former director and principal librarian of the British Museum says in his book "Bible and archaeology" about the New Testament:

The interval, then, between the dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible and the last doubt that the scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written have now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.

F.F Bruce goes on to say;

There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament

Your view certainly isn't one that seems to be supported by the evidence or held by historians however, I am open to correction.

 

[Atothetheist]

There is some dispute over Mark however, you won't find many historians or scholars agreeing with you that the Bible has been significantly altered. Sir Fredrick Kenyon, former director and principal librarian of the British Museum says in his book "Bible and archaeology" about the New Testament:

The interval, then, between the dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible and the last doubt that the scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written have now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.

F.F Bruce goes on to say;

There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament

Your view certainly isn't one that seems to be supported by the evidence or held by historians however, I am open to correction.

Bart Ehrman ( Bibical historian.) agrees on this position. by giving me only one quote, and then making the assertion that MOST of the historians
don't agree is a logical fallacy.

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16

 

[Atothetheist]

Bart Ehrman ( Bibical historian.) agrees on this position. by giving me only one quote, and then making the assertion that MOST of the historians don't agree is a logical fallacy.

Btw.....

for the shellfish one:

"And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:"

Lev11:10

 

[Atothetheist]

Sorry guys. I made a mistake. i had incorectly type what it was on the book of mathew. It was After th ressurection took place, but 16:9-20 were the verses added later.

 

[wayseer]

Here is the thing. Christianity goes against the Scientific Method. Faith is unscientific. It is unscientific because it requires belief without evidence. By OE i am assuming old earth.. Yea I tend to side with scientific facts.

So do I but what has that to do with faith?

The doctrine of hell is a direct insult to your assertion that christians are non judgemental because the bible tells us who is going to hell.

Actually it doesn't - it is people who tell other people to go to hell.

Do you believe that as an atheist I am going it hell?

What I believe does not effect you - Christianity is not contagious.

 

[wayseer]

Back the viewpoint of christianity. Regardless if you stand it up to the scientific method. Christianity would be shot down, it is only natural. I can't accept christian doctrine because it relys on faith.

So why are you here - looking for light entertainment?