"Blind faith" versus "choosing to believe"

[paulm50]

Indeed, it is a problem to me too.

However, I won't say the Bible says anything "wrong". The Bible is not clear on this issue. There still could be alternative interpretations.

And the Bible certainly does not have "huge amount" errors. In fact, I do not see ANY error in the Bible, even there are some unanswered questions. I may not prove that some issues the Bible says are true, but you can not prove they are wrong either.

In particular, if you do think the Bible has a lot errors, then you better not claim that you are a Christian. That would make you look pretty dumb.

So all the dinosaur and mammal remains of long dead animals came from where and are what? There is nothing about it in the bible, it starts with farmers.

So all those painting of men hunting don't exist, or they never bothered to draw pictures of them farming. Then explain them hunting animals that went extinct. Explain why they date a lot further back to the times theologians estimate to be the time of Adam and Eve.

The bible has been proved wrong time and time again. The problem for some is they choose to not believe it, then cherry pick what they do believe and wish to follow.

How many of these bible laws do you follow?

Some of the Strange Laws in the Bible

Bible Laws

Laws for Women

If any were repealed, you're free to mention them.

As a person who lives by the morals and teachings of Jesus. I reject these petty bronze age laws of men trying to survive in a desert culture. I realise they were created by men, like most of the bible. So can select what I believe.

 

[juvenissun]

So all the dinosaur and mammal remains of long dead animals came from where and are what? There is nothing about it in the bible, it starts with farmers.

So all those painting of men hunting don't exist, or they never bothered to draw pictures of them farming. Then explain them hunting animals that went extinct. Explain why they date a lot further back to the times theologians estimate to be the time of Adam and Eve.

The bible has been proved wrong time and time again. The problem for some is they choose to not believe it, then cherry pick what they do believe and wish to follow.

How many of these bible laws do you follow?

Some of the Strange Laws in the Bible

Bible Laws

Laws for Women

If any were repealed, you're free to mention them.

As a person who lives by the morals and teachings of Jesus. I reject these petty bronze age laws of men trying to survive in a desert culture. I realise they were created by men, like most of the bible. So can select what I believe.

If you can calm down and take one issue at a time, then I am able to continue the discussion. You are very emotional.

 

[paulm50]

If you can calm down and take one issue at a time, then I am able to continue the discussion. You are very emotional.

Choose anyone you like to discuss. I'm just pointing out the many parts which are wrong.

And the laws you probably ignore.

 

[juvenissun]

Choose anyone you like to discuss. I'm just pointing out the many parts which are wrong.

And the laws you probably ignore.

Everyone of you comments is questionable. I don't have problem. It is your problem.

 

[Joshua260]

Sure, I'd imagine we have various of writings from around 30AD from all over the world. Nothing to do with eyewitness testimony of Jesus or anything, of course, but I wouldn't be surprised that there's some sort of writing from someone somewhere that's survived to this day.

Yes. There are several documents written by witnesses who saw the risen Jesus after he was crucified and they were collected into the bible around 200 AD.

But let's stay on target:
The point of the OP is that an atheist cannot rationally claim that we Christians have a blind faith (as in having zero evidence) and at the same time claim that the only way people come to believe is through evidence. The two claims are contradictory. Whether or not there is evidence (subjective, objective, real, or imaginary) is a different question.

How many atheists do this? I'm guessing the number is vanishingly close to zero.

The question is not about how many atheists do this but "isn't it contradictory if they do?"

 

[bhsmte]

Yes. There are several documents written by witnesses who saw the risen Jesus after he was crucified and they were collected into the bible around 200 AD.

But let's stay on target:
The point of the OP is that an atheist cannot rationally claim that we Christians have a blind faith (as in having zero evidence) and at the same time claim that the only way people come to believe is through evidence. The two claims are contradictory. Whether or not there is evidence (subjective, objective, real, or imaginary) is a different question.

The question is not about how many atheists do this but "isn't it contradictory if they do?"

What are these documents written by people that actually witnessed a risen Jesus?

 

[JGG]

I guess you want me to say: nowhere. But it won't do you any good. It is not legal document. You need to understand, which is very difficult, sometimes.

I don't want you to say nowhere, I want you to either explain where "Christianity" makes the claim, or tell me that Christianity doesn't make the claim.

To refresh your memory:

Only Christianity says that there is no human anywhere else but on the earth.

A very low level question.

If what the Bible says is true, then Christianity is true.

This lead me to believe that the claim that there is no human anywhere else but on Earth is found somewhere in the Bible. If that's not true, then on what basis do you believe that Christianity makes this claim?

One aspect of this thread is the idea of "Blind Faith". I explained, that I hold blind faith to be when someone has faith, without really knowing what they believe, or why they believe it. Can you explain to us why you believe that "Only Christianity says that there is no human anywhere else but on the earth"?

 

[JGG]

I think most worms may not be counted as "alive". This is classified based on the definition.
I think this definition makes sense, and it does solve a lot of problems.

So if jellyfish and worms are not alive, what are they?

 

[bhsmte]

So if jellyfish and worms are not alive, what are they?

Keep in mind, this is coming from someone who also claimed; rocks were alive.

 

[Joshua260]

What are these documents written by people that actually witnessed a risen Jesus?

At least some of the gospels are written by people who saw the risen Jesus, Paul saw Jesus on the Road to Damascus, some other epistles are written by other apostles who saw Jesus, and John saw Jesus as described in Revelation. Of course, atheists will deny that any of these documents are written by their traditional authors, but there's good reason to believe that the traditional authors are correct for the most part. But please, stay on topic!! We can talk about the evidences for the Resurrection in another thread in the Exploring Christianity forum. For now:

The point of the OP is that an atheist cannot rationally claim that we Christians have a blind faith (as in having zero evidence) and at the same time claim that the only way people come to believe is through evidence. The two claims are contradictory. Whether or not there is evidence (subjective, objective, real, or imaginary) is a different question.

 

[bhsmte]

At least some of the gospels are written by people who saw the risen Jesus, Paul saw Jesus on the Road to Damascus, some other epistles are written by other apostles who saw Jesus, and John saw Jesus as described in Revelation. Of course, atheists will deny that any of these documents are written by their traditional authors, but there's good reason to believe that the traditional authors are correct for the most part. But please, stay on topic!! We can talk about the evidences for the Resurrection in another thread in the Exploring Christianity forum. For now:

The point of the OP is that an atheist cannot rationally claim that we Christians have a blind faith (as in having zero evidence) and at the same time claim that the only way people come to believe is through evidence. The two claims are contradictory. Whether or not there is evidence (subjective, objective, real, or imaginary) is a different question.

Sorry, it isn't atheists that claim the gospels were not written by the authors placed on them, but even Christian NT scholars readily admit the authors are anonymous.

This fact is well accepted with established NT scholars and just a little bit of investigation of the same, will confirm this.

In regards to evidence, the evidence you have are gospels written by unknown authors, that are not eye witness accounts and were written decades after Jesus died. The lack of contemporary sources about Jesus is also why the majority of NT historians can only agree on the following as reliable history when it comes to Jesus:

-Jesus was a real person
-Jesus was baptized
-Jesus had followers
-Jesus was crucified

Beyond that, the historical method doesn't do the NT any favors.

 

[JGG]

The point of the OP is that an atheist cannot rationally claim that we Christians have a blind faith (as in having zero evidence) and at the same time claim that the only way people come to believe is through evidence. The two claims are contradictory. Whether or not there is evidence (subjective, objective, real, or imaginary) is a different question.

Okay, but we can rationally claim both if you don't understand what we mean by "blind faith" (which you don't), or if we don't say that people only believe things through evidence (which we don't).

We're not stupid people here, we recognize that the end game is for you to say "atheists are irrational because they make contradictory claims!" so we very want you to recognize that these are two claims that we generally don't make. Can you do that?

 

[JGG]

Keep in mind, this is coming from someone who also claimed; rocks were alive.

Oh. Well, those definitely exist on places other than Earth.

 

[bhsmte]

So if jellyfish and worms are not alive, what are they?

Does this mean, if someone steps on a worm, they can't kill it?

 

[Joshua260]

Sorry, it isn't atheists that claim the gospels were not written by the authors placed on them, but even Christian NT scholars readily admit the authors are anonymous.

This fact is well accepted with established NT scholars and just a little bit of investigation of the same, will confirm this..

Maybe NT Scholars like those from the Jesus Seminar, which the majority of NT scholars don't take seriously. However, that is not a consensus among them all. In fact, it is accepted by most that the gospel of John was actually written by John (although not specified within). Luke, who may not have personally witnessed the risen Jesus, did witness the converted Paul, who had nothing to gain by lying about seeing Jesus except for a beheading. Most of the Pauline letters are accepted to be written by Paul (who testified that he saw the risen Jesus). I also said that some of the other epistles were written by other witnesses (Peter, James, etc.).

Please stay on topic from now on in this thread. I would be glad to discuss this more, but please start your own thread and stop trying to highjack mine. This thread is about whether or not atheists should made the contradictory claims I mentioned in the OP.

 

[bhsmte]

Maybe NT Scholars like those from the Jesus Seminar, which the majority of NT scholars don't take seriously. However, that is not a consensus among them all. In fact, it is accepted by most that the gospel of John was actually written by John (although not specified within). Luke, who may not have personally witnessed the risen Jesus, did witness the converted Paul, who had nothing to gain by lying about seeing Jesus except for a beheading. Most of the Pauline letters are accepted to be written by Paul (who testified that he saw the risen Jesus). I also said that some of the other epistles were written by other witnesses (Peter, James, etc.).

Please stay on topic from now on in this thread. I would be glad to discuss this more, but please start your own thread and stop trying to highjack mine. This thread is about whether or not atheists should made the contradictory claims I mentioned in the OP.

Did you hear me bring up the Jesus seminar? I don't believe I did.

I will state again, the majority of NT scholars have accepted (and for a long time now) the gospels are anonymous. They also agree, the gospels were written 40-70 years after Jesus died. They also agree, the originals are lost and we only have copies, starting about 200 or so years after Jesus died.

And don't tell me I am off topic, because you made the claim about these documents were written by eye witnesses.

 

[Joshua260]

Okay, but we can rationally claim both if you don't understand what we mean by "blind faith" (which you don't), or if we don't say that people only believe things through evidence (which we don't).

We're not stupid people here, we recognize that the end game is for you to say "atheists are irrational because they make contradictory claims!" so we very want you to recognize that these are two claims that we generally don't make. Can you do that?

As I said earlier, I have personally heard atheists make these claims. Others on this thread have also said that they have experienced hearing the same from atheists.

I don't think you are paying attention though. Read carefully:
One cannot claim that Christians have a "blind faith" (meaning that they have zero evidence) and also claim that people only come to believe through evidence. If you profess that Christians believe in Christianity, then you must accept that you are also admitting that they had some kind of evidence that led them to believe it. Whether or not you think the evidence is subjective, objective, real, or imaginary is irrelevant. The bottom line is that they had some kind of evidence that led them to believe in Christianity and you cannot thus say that they have a "blind faith".

 

[Joshua260]

And don't tell me I am off topic, because you made the claim about these documents were written by eye witnesses.

The topic is about contradictory claims that atheists make, not about the validity of evidence. Can you not tell the difference?

 

[Joshua260]

I will state again, the majority of NT scholars have accepted (and for a long time now) the gospels are anonymous.

That is not the same as claiming that they were not written by the traditional authors. But when you ask that question, it's mostly just the liberal skeptical NT scholars who hold tight to that claim.

 

[JGG]

As I said earlier, I have personally heard atheists make these claims. Others on this thread have also said that they have experienced hearing the same from atheists.

Great. Show me. And remember, they have to be the same atheist making both claims.

I don't think you are paying attention though. Read carefully:
One cannot claim that Christians have a "blind faith" (meaning that they have zero evidence) and also claim that people only come to believe through evidence. If you profess that Christians believe in Christianity, then you must accept that you are also admitting that they had some kind of evidence that led them to believe it.

Evidence is a poor word here. I would say influence. That influence may be some sort of evidence, but not necessarily so.

Whether or not you think the evidence is subjective, objective, real, or imaginary is irrelevant. The bottom line is that they had some kind of evidence that led them to believe in Christianity and you cannot thus say that they have a "blind faith".

Yes, but "subjective evidence", and "imaginary evidence" are not really evidence in the way we use the word. That's why influence is a better word. Plus, influence includes things like community or social influence, emotional influence, biological influence, geographical influence. If I tell you that the moon is made of green cheese, and you believe me, there is no actual evidence in shaping your belief, but lots of influence involved.