Is it wrong to demand evidence?

Albion · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
Christianity, I mean.

Well, Christianity doesn't fit the definition you gave us, so there's no way of answering it if it's supposed to be about Christianity.

After all, doesn't Christianity claim to be the correct fulfillment of the OT texts (and therefore, modern Judaism being an incorrect interpretation of those same texts)?

Fulfillment, yes. But that doesn't mean continuation without any alteration or change.

Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and even some other religions have a common origin, but they differ widely in their specific beliefs and practices.

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

juvenissun said:
This is another good enough evidence. The Bible says that many many many times.

Yet Jesus is recorded as saying few would find his path. Doesn't that discount the world's largest religion?

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
Do you believe--really believe--that George Washington was the first U.S. president? Did you know him well?

I don't know for sure, and it doesn't really matter since knowledge of him does not impact my life, as my eternal salvation does not depend on whether or not George was the first U.S. President.

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
Well, Christianity doesn't fit the definition you gave us, so there's no way of answering it if it's supposed to be about Christianity.

Fulfillment, yes. But that doesn't mean continuation without any alteration or change.

Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and even some other religions have a common origin, but they differ widely in their specific beliefs and practices.

Why doesn't Christianity fit my definition? After all, its central component involves a blood sacrifice.

RDKirk · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
Yet Jesus is recorded as saying few would find his path. Doesn't that discount the world's largest religion?

Yes, it does. Essentially, from all Jesus says of His followers, any religion that gains too much popularity in the world must not be His.

This is the essential meaning of Jesus being the "uncut stone the builder's rejected." The reason the builders--that is, the architects of human governments--reject Christ is because an uncut stone does not fit into their planned edifice. If it fits into a human government, it's not Christianity.

Albion · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
Yet Jesus is recorded as saying few would find his path. Doesn't that discount the world's largest religion?

He also instructed his closest followers to make believers and disciples of "all nations," so I would say that the answer would have to be "no." He also said that when this was accomplished, the end would come.

Albion · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
Why doesn't Christianity fit my definition? After all, its central component involves a blood sacrifice.

We don't sacrifice any animals or humans.

RDKirk · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
He also instructed his closest followers to make believers and disciples of "all nations," so I would say that the answer would have to be "no." He also said that when this was accomplished, the end would come.

How are you interpreting "disciples of all nations?"

Are you interpreting that as "make disciples who are of all nations" or "make all nations disciples?"

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

RDKirk said:
Yes, it does. Essentially, from all Jesus says of His followers, any religion that gains too much popularity in the world must not be His.

This is the essential meaning of Jesus being the "uncut stone the builder's rejected." The reason the builders--that is, the architects of human governments--reject Christ is because an uncut stone does not fit into their planned edifice. If it fits into a human government, it's not Christianity.

Yet, you are Christian?

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
He also instructed his closest followers to make believers and disciples of "all nations," so I would say that the answer would have to be "no." He also said that when this was accomplished, the end would come.

Could you provide a reference where it states that "making disciples of all nations" would result in his second coming?

Albion · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
I don't know for sure, and it doesn't really matter since knowledge of him does not impact my life, as my eternal salvation does not depend on whether or not George was the first U.S. President.

Not so. The structure and functioning of the country you live in and under whose rule you operate does have a connection to him. If you say that "personally verifiable" applies only to religious matters, I'd call that selective or unusual, but I'll accept your answer that verification of claims is an issue only when it comes to matters concerning salvation. I don't know why that should be, but if that's what you meant, OK.

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
We don't sacrifice any animals or humans.

Wasn't Jesus supposedly sacrificed?

Albion · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
Could you provide a reference where it states that "making disciples of all nations" would result in his second coming?

I didn't use the term 'Second Coming,' but yes.

This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14).

Albion · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
Wasn't Jesus supposedly sacrificed?

Indeed. He gave his life as a sacrifice. We do not sacrifice him again--or anyone else--however.

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
Not so. The structure and functioning of the country you live in and under whose rule you operate does have a connection to him. If you say that "personally verifiable" applies only to religious matters, I'd call that selective or unusual, but I'll accept your answer that verification of claims is an issue only when it comes to matters concerning salvation. I don't know why that should be, but if that's what you meant, OK.

I can personally verify the structure, rules, and laws of the State here and now. Whether or not they are connected to him is irrelevant, since faith in George is not a component of what affects me here and now.

I believe that Buddha was a historical figure, but even if he wasn't, that wouldn't be a huge dealbreaker for me. What matters now are the precepts and the path he discovered, and these things I can personally verify through personal practice. The important part of Buddhism is practice of the Dhamma (the way/law), not faith in the Buddha.

Christianity, however, revolves mainly around faith in the historicity of Jesus Christ, therefore someone like myself can legitimately require personally verifiable evidence of his existence, sacrifice, teachings, etc.

Albion · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
I can personally verify the structure, rules, and laws of the State here and now. Whether or not they are connected to him is irrelevant, since faith in George is not a component of what affects me here and now.

As I said, if you want to define "personal verification" (that you said was all-important in the search for truth) in that way, I'll accept it as your intent or usage.

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
I didn't use the term 'Second Coming,' but yes.

This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14).

Yet Jesus also stated that this would be fulfilled in that generation (Mt 24:34). The language used by the writers of the epistles seem to suggest that they also expected his return in their lifetimes.

Albion · Apr 3, 2015

ananda said:
Yet Jesus also stated that this would be fulfilled in that generation (Mt 24:34). The language used by the writers of the epistles seem to suggest that they also expected his return in their lifetimes.

His words can be, and usually are, accepted as referring to the generation that would witness what he was describing as going to happen near the end, not the generation of the listeners.

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
As I said, if you want to define "personal verification" (that you said was all-important in the search for truth) in that way, I'll accept it as your intent or usage.

What else would you say is more important than the ability to personally verify things, in the search for truth?

ananda · Apr 3, 2015

Albion said:
His words can, and usually are, accepted as referring to the generation that would witness what he was describing as going to happen near the end, not the generation of the listeners.

Yes, I understand that is generally the standard Christian interpretation of that verse, but forgive me if I disagree ... IMO it would be a useless statement made by Jesus if the standard interpretation was the case. It's like saying "One day mankind will travel to Alpha Centauri. It will happen to this generation that lives to experience that." Kinda pointless to add that, IMO.

Is it wrong to demand evidence?

Facilitator

Early Buddhist

Early Buddhist

Early Buddhist

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Facilitator

Facilitator

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Early Buddhist

Early Buddhist

Facilitator

Early Buddhist

Facilitator

Facilitator

Early Buddhist

Facilitator

Early Buddhist

Facilitator

Early Buddhist

Early Buddhist

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency