Did Jesus Even Care....

[Gene Parmesan]

I don't understand why you would say this. I don't think that He's a magician. More a hard-worker, like me ...

I assume then that you do not believe God is "all powerful" then? Because if some things are more difficult than others then he could potentially be more powerful. He's not like the God described in Genesis that can simply speak things into existence; is that right?

 

[A_Thinker]

I assume then that you do not believe God is "all powerful" then? Because if some things are more difficult than others then he could potentially be more powerful. He's not like the God described in Genesis that can simply speak things into existence; is that right?

I can be quite capable of making or accomplishing something, ... but that doesn't immediately confer that it is easy for me.

The power to accomplish all ... does not necessarily traslate to "the power to accomplish all ... with ease".

I see the use of the term all-powerful as more of a comparative ... with the capability of humanity. If I went back in time 6,000 years ... and demonstrated some of what I could accomplish as a modern man, they would, likely, think that I might be "all-powerful" ...

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I can be quite capable of making or accomplishing something, ... but that doesn't immediately confer that it is easy for me.

The power to accomplish all ... does not necessarily traslate to "the power to accomplish all ... with ease".

I see the use of the term all-powerful as more of a comparative ... with the capability of humanity. If I went back in time 6,000 years ... and demonstrated some of what I could accomplish as a modern man, they would, likely, think that I might be "all-powerful" ...

I apologize for any inaccurate assumptions I may have made. Your take is definitely not what I'm used to coming across in that the Christian God you believe in is not as powerful as typically described. But the logical fallacy of the Watchmaker argument remains.

It states that we can differentiate a watch as created and rocks as not created by intelligence, and thus watches and rocks and literally everything is intelligently created. It's just not a coherent argument.

 

[A_Thinker]

It states that we can differentiate a watch as created and rocks as not created by intelligence, and thus watches and rocks and literally everything is intelligently created.

Not it doesn't.

BOTH are, actually, rather complex.

One is just MORE complex.

For example, I can compare sitting down to dinner ... with completing my Tax Returns.

Sitting down to dinner ... seems comparatively easy.

But, it really isn't. Intelligence will be required in the acquiring of funds, selection of food items, preparation of food items, etc.

Of course I could conclude ... that completing my Tax Returns ... requires MORE intelligence ...

 

[Tinker Grey]

One is just MORE complex.

What metric are you using?

 

[A_Thinker]

What metric are you using?

My experience ...

 

[Tinker Grey]

My experience ...

Then your assertion that one is more complex than another is as unsupportable as saying the rock is more complex than the watch.

How would you determine that one rock is more complex than some other rock?

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Not it doesn't.

BOTH are, actually, rather complex.

One is just MORE complex.

For example, I can compare sitting down to dinner ... with completing my Tax Returns.

Sitting down to dinner ... seems comparatively easy.

But, it really isn't. Intelligence will be required in the acquiring of funds, selection of food items, preparation of food items, etc.

Of course I could conclude ... that completing my Tax Returns ... requires MORE intelligence ...

If everything is created you can not use complexity as a distinguishing characteristic to identify that something is created. There is literally nothing to distinguish against. The amount of theoretical effort required is beside the point.

 

[cvanwey]

Our use of the word "believe" differs ...

I'm afraid I'm right there with you, in the concept of 'belief.' Which can be exchanged with 'trust' or 'hope.'

Can you, at least, answer the question I posed in post #69? (i.e.) rephrased:

Two other men are on the cross with Jesus. According to Jesus, one man is saved, the other is not. Is this because....

a: the other man thinks He was not the Messiah, but just another man claiming to be?
b: knows He was the Messiah, and chose to rebel anyhow?

************

Were you going to address the rest of post #69, or maybe, are you now conceding all other points? Or maybe other..?

 

[cvanwey]

Orderly enough to support life ...

Even if @Gene Parmesan were to somehow concede your entire argument, because you made a case for creationism, all you now have is a claim for deism - (at best). This thread is asking if Jesus even cared to provide evidence for His resurrection, which in turn, according to the Bible, IS the way we would know that Jesus is the real deal (i.e.):

"And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith."

You state Jesus' objective was not necessarily to provide evidence for His resurrection, and yet, we see contradiction. If you address post #69, where we left off, we can continue exploring...

 

[Bobber]

So God sometimes intervenes on your financial decisions, but ignores millions of other requests to help the hungry?

But then again that wouldn't mean the other's testimony here doesn't demonstrate God exists. It merely makes you ask another question why God does some things for some and not others, and YES there are answers in the scriptures' about those things.

 

[A_Thinker]

Two other men are on the cross with Jesus. According to Jesus, one man is saved, the other is not. Is this because....

a: the other man thinks He was not the Messiah, but just another man claiming to be?
b: knows He was the Messiah, and chose to rebel anyhow?

One thief treated Jesus exactly like the rest of the world.

The other thief chose to trust in who Jesus said that He was ... and to do what He said that He would do.

Were you going to address the rest of post #69, or maybe, are you now conceding all other points? Or maybe other..?

I'll check, but I believe that most of that discussion hinges on which concept of belief you hold that the scriptures are speaking of ...

 

[A_Thinker]

Even if @Gene Parmesan were to somehow concede your entire argument, because you made a case for creationism, all you now have is a claim for deism - (at best).

That all that he asked about ...

 

[cvanwey]

One thief treated Jesus exactly like the rest of the world.

The other thief chose to trust in who Jesus said that He was ... and to do what He said that He would do.

Let me provide a dichotomy:

The (other) man thought (a or b)?...

a: He was the Messiah
b: He was not the Messiah

I'll check, but I believe that most of that discussion hinges on the which concept of belief you hold that the scriptures are speaking of ...

Your provided 'definition' of belief looks to be having 'faith/trust/hope' in a claim. This is fine. I can get on board with this....

Unaddressed bullet points in post #69:

1. "God did not create humans, but that humans created God."?.?.?.?
2. The puddle looks around and states "wow, my surroundings were designed specifically for me."
3. And it's one thing to believe Jesus was born, lived, preached, and was executed. It's a completely different category to also believe He was born of a virgin, walked on water, and rose from the grave.
4. In the case for a resurrection claim, Jesus looks to think evidence is quite important (for some).
5. Hearsay is not evidence for '500' witnesses
6. If you are going to place your 'trust/faith' in one claim, then how did you discard all other claims?
7. Jesus seems to save, based upon 'belief/trust/hope'?
8. Jesus provides overwhelming evidence for some, but then expects others to rely upon faith alone?
9. How might one rationalize prayer to work?

 

[cvanwey]

But then again that wouldn't mean the other's testimony here doesn't demonstrate God exists. It merely makes you ask another question why God does some things for some and not others, and YES there are answers in the scriptures' about those things.

Do tell?

 

[A_Thinker]

Let me provide a dichotomy:

The (other) man thought (a or b)?...

a: He was the Messiah
b: He was not the Messiah

The saved thief, at the very least, HOPED that Jesus would benefit him in some way ...

 

[cvanwey]

The saved thief, at the very least, HOPED that Jesus would benefit him in some way ...

I think we may still be on differing tracks here

The scenario goes as follows:

A):man
B):Jesus
C):man

A):man trusted in Jesus as the Messiah.

How about C):man? Did C):man either:

a: Also think He was the Messiah, but rebel/reject His request
b: Not think He was the Messiah, and discard Him as not being the Messiah

 

[A_Thinker]

. And it's one thing to believe Jesus was born, lived, preached, and was executed. It's a completely different category to also believe He was born of a virgin, walked on water, and rose from the grave.

It's also different to believe that, no matter what His life circumstances were, that following Jesus is a benefit for you.

Note that most of those that followed Jesus early ...did not know any of the other facts of his life.

 

[cvanwey]

It's also different to believe that, no matter what His life circumstances were, that following Jesus is a benefit for you.

Note that most of those that followed Jesus early ...did not know any of the other facts of his life.

Sure, maybe He was the idol to many; just like movie stars, musicians, and sports figures of today are for so many. As I stated prior, the Bible seems to be pretty crystal clear. If He did not rise from the dead, your faith in Him is in vein.

 

[A_Thinker]

Sure, maybe He was the idol to many; just like movie stars, musicians, and sports figures of today are for so many. As I stated prior, the Bible seems to be pretty crystal clear. If He did not rise from the dead, your faith in Him is in vain.

I would say, rather, that He was beloved of many people, because of how He expressed His love to them.

And ... why wouldn't we believe He rose from the dead ?

What would prevent us from believing this ?

I mean ...

there's no body.

Thousands went to their deaths because they preached that He had resurrected, including hundreds which would have known that it wasn't true.

His life/death caused a dramatic shift in belief-systems among the Jews.

There were several factions which stood to gain if they could have proven the resurrection was false, and yet they never did.