J
jdbear
Guest
Within oneself.Pink Spider said,
Really? In what way does the cleaning go on right
now?
Upvote
0
Within oneself.Pink Spider said,
Really? In what way does the cleaning go on right
now?
Hello again, friend!Pinko,
If I were a man of faith - I would say: 'This wideThere are a lot of people making comments here and not many agree obviously.
How is that possible? How can I ask 'guidance' fromBut going on the basis of what the bible says, for you to make a decision one way or the other about prophecy and other deeper subjects inside the word would be difficult until you've come to know The Lord personally.
Yes - and that's exactly what I'm doing right now.I can only encourage you to take every verse at its obvious meaning first. Don't look for the hidden, spiritual meaning behind what is written.
Thanks will do.For a better understanding of what I mean check out my thread - biblical rules of interpretation.
Good question. Tough answer.What is holding you back from believing Pink?
I might take you up on that... Thanks!Maybe I can help answer your objections.
Shoulda put this but had to look it up
Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:14-16 ASV)
I can not yield myself to an entity that almostBy yielding yourself to God.
Pink Spider said,
I can not yield myself to an entity that almost
certainly does not exist.
On a personal note:
I am reading a gospel (Mark) the first time in my life -
and I am amazed. It's great stuff.
Originally Posted by ebia
[...]If you look at the OT texts that the NT saysYes - that struck me too when I was checking
Jesus fulfilled in their original context they often aren't predictive at all,
or are clearly talking about something else entirely.
out some of those 'prophecies'...
Originally Posted by ebia
[...]No - but the alleged 'fulfillments' are widely used as
But then what is the point of prophesy in the bible - usually its about warning or promise. Generally its not about giving someone later a handy magical proof.
proof that Jesus was the Christ and savior (e.g. Lee
Strobel).
Originally Posted by ebia
[...]Yes - that makes sense. quote]
What the NT texts are doing by referring back in this way is NOT trying to prove Jesus, its trying to understand Jesus by thinking about him in
terms of those texts.
I've heard a popular internet atheist trash Strobel (I think unfairly) and his close followers have done so also, but sometimes I wonder if they have actually read his stuff. I admit that his books are written for the laiety but all his info comes from sholars and historians. He just gathers the info into a concvenient package, and that's why I still recommend his books.
As far as the prophecies, some quote 44, some over 100, and some over 300...the actual number is debateable. However, it would be a mistake to dismiss them all. Many are very specifically written concerning the messiah and Jesus fulfills many of them. Throughout the many years that the old testament books were written, it had been prohesied that the messiah would come from Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Jesse, David, born in Bethlehem, and also come before the destruction of the temple. I'm sure that one could find many more that are very SPECIFICALLY written concerning the coming messiah. So it is perfectly okay to use the argument that Jesus fulfilled many of the old testament messianic prophecies.
Since I am not a man of faith - I am just confused
and turn to the things I know and can rely on:
Hard Science and Mathematics.
If you haven't already done so - then read:Sometimes I speculate that people (the atheists) don't know how a truth (in general) can be conveyed. And they don't understand about how a scientific truth is specially detected, that is, how humans consider a scientific truth is actually a truth.
Science does not provide absolute truths.Regarding to how a truth can be conveyed,
History has no evidence? Seriously?Basically, history as a whole has no evidence. It's all tied up to a human witness called the *historian*. Similarly, any piece of news (think about any news before the creation of photos and video, or go to a museum to grap a newspaper of 150 years ago then ask will you believe what is said in the newspaper) can be that it's never evidenced. It's all tired up to yet another human witness called the *reporter*.
Truth sometimes (most of the times) can only be conveyed this way (such as history), or at least it can only be efficiently approached this way (such as today's news).
Yes I do. Buy a telescope and check the movementEven science is conveyed this way, that is, rely on faith to a human witness rather than getting the evidence. Do you have any evidence that the earth is actually revolving around the sun, or you just conveniently choose to believe what it is said and delivered from yet another human witness called the *scientist*.
I see your point. However - many scientific theoriesYou cannot completely untie from your trust/faith on the human witness (called the *reporter*).
That's no way to prove or ascertain anything.Sacrifice himself for what is written, that could be the only efficient way.
Yes, yes - I have heard that argument a few times.You can randomly name a historical figure in your history, then show us the evidence that he ever existed. Without referencing what was written down by another human, most likely you get none!
I told you before - science does NOT provide absoluteAs for how humans consider a scientific truth to be a truth. Science is a very specific means to detect a very specific kind of truth. First the kind of truth must be repeatable, not for them to be called a science but for them to be surely detected beyond doubt. That is, you might have called a lot of subject a science, but only a specific one you can get to an undeniable precision.
It is a very promising hypothesis that explains a lotIs the Big Bang Theory a science ?
We do not know yet, whether Big Bangs haveIt is a science if it is assumed that the Big Bang is a repeatable natural phenomenon. However, as long as the Big Bang won't repeat itself before humans, it remains you faith to believe whether it is so or not.
Of course I would![/size][/font]
That's true. If you had witnessed Jesus alive from the dead, would you believe in the God He taught about?
WhY do you think those who said they saw Him alive from the dead lied about it?Pink Spider said,
Of course I would!
I think 'something' (I call it 'the spirit' - not to bePink,
C. S. Lewis wrote "A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. There are traps everywhere--'Bibles laid open, millions of surprises,' as Herbert says, 'fine nets and stratagems.' God is, if I may say it, very unscrupulous."
I hope my my Lord deals unscrupulously with you. [/size]
I just watched his videos. IMO he is too heavilyI've heard a popular internet atheist trash Strobel (I think unfairly) and his close followers have done so also, but sometimes I wonder if they have actually read his stuff.
It was not my intention to trash him. His stuff isI admit that his books are written for the laiety but all his info comes from sholars and historians. He just gathers the info into a concvenient package, and that's why I still recommend his books.
I do not yet know - nor do I have the knowledgeAs far as the prophecies, some quote 44, some over 100, and some over 300...the actual number is debateable. However, it would be a mistake to dismiss them all.
As long as we can be sure that it's not retro-So it is perfectly okay to use the argument that Jesus fulfilled many of the old testament messianic prophecies.
Cool!Hi Pink. I have no problem with science and math. I did pretty well myself in those subjects also. More specifically, I was a huge physics fan.
Yes that is true!But the only thing those subjects will do for you is describe the NATURAL universe.
Do we know that for sure?Part of the Christian message is that there's a supernatural part of life, and there's just no way you will ever be able to use science to measure anything supernatural.
I don't like C.S. Lewis much - but perhaps I willI think a great book that discusses the interaction between the supernatural and the natural is Miracles by C.S. Lewis.
Or that there can be an interaction a all.I think one of the most interesting things in life is that strange interaction between the two.
Well I understand you - no problem. We can notOne day, you have a lump of lifeless chemicals and the next day life appears. Oops! How did that one get in there?
Good point and very persuasive...But seriouosly, this is exactly the kind of thing one will find when they search for where the supernatural and the natural has intermingled...it will be like a crime scene. People will say "what happened here?" Some might say that something supernatural might have occured, others will immediately rule out all possibity of supernatural affects and restrict their search only to natural causes. But what if there really IS a supernatural side? Are we going to ignore it, since we can't measure it directly?
Thanks for the compliment - but I'm not that smart.Anyway, I totally appreciate your time in researching our faith. You seem to me to be a pretty smart person and I think you strive for truth, but I think some of it will be difficult for you because the supernatural is at the heart of Christianity.