Why does God choose to remain invisible and undetectable?

[Ken-1122]

I'm not sure what you mean by "outside religion". Name one scientist that's accepted today outside of science.

What scientists claim is accepted by people outside of science. What religious people claim; is not accepted outside the people of that particular religion.

But to your point, about 70% of Americans believe that Jesus was a prophet. He's pretty well accepted.

In Islam Jesus is a prophet. In Christianity; he is seen as God's son and savior of the world.

Why dismiss the multitudes of eyewitness testimonies that came from the first century?

Because there is no claim of Jesus raising from the dead outside the Bible.

God is a God who saves sinners. There need to be sinners in order for God to be seen as a savior.

So God needs to use people wrecked with sin to save people wrecked with sin? Didn't your Jesus say something about the blind leading the blind? What did he mean by that???

Here we'll have to agree to disagree. I think that you know that God exists but you just very much dislike this idea.

If I were in the business of denying that which I do not like, I would be denying earthquakes, hurricanes, poisonous snakes, and a plethora of other dangerous things and situations. I'd be dead by now.

Ken

 

[WindStaff]

Of course it depicts Jesus, just like every other medieval painting of Jesus.

Because an Italian Jew would never actually look like.. an Italian Jew

 

[NewOrthodoxDenomination1]

Because there is no claim of Jesus raising from the dead outside the Bible

Actually, there is plenty of documents outside the Bible written by ancient historians. Also, you must consider each book of the New Testament a separate document accounting claims of Christ's resurrection, some of which report many eyewitness claims. Any collection of ancient documents containing that many claims of an event would be heralded as a marvelous find proving once and for all that a historical event actually happened. The problem is that it claims the impossible so people deny its historical credibility.

I would provide a link explaining all of this but I am too new to.

 

[bhsmte]

Actually, there is plenty of documents outside the Bible written by ancient historians. Also, you must consider each book of the New Testament a separate document accounting claims of Christ's resurrection, some of which report many eyewitness claims. Any collection of ancient documents containing that many claims of an event would be heralded as a marvelous find proving once and for all that a historical event actually happened. The problem is that it claims the impossible so people deny its historical credibility.

I would provide a link explaining all of this but I am too new to.

Could you list these documents written by contemporary historians during Jesus' time that discuss him and specifically mention the resurrection?

 

[Ken-1122]

Opps!

 

[WindStaff]

Could you list these documents written by contemporary historians during Jesus' time that discuss him and specifically mention the resurrection?

Yeah, I could imagine that one educated person in ancient Israel witnessing God coming out of a cave and writing about it.

He wouldn't go and follow or anything, and forget the stupid quill and parchment, he would do what any other person would do- write it down

 

[bhsmte]

Yeah, I could imagine that one educated person in ancient Israel witnessing God coming out of a cave and writing about it.

He wouldn't go and follow or anything, and forget the stupid quill and parchment, he would do what any other person would do- write it down

Do you have the list of these contemporary historians?

 

[WindStaff]

Do you have the list of these contemporary historians?

2000 years ago, a 'historian' was very rare. Even then, the idea that one is going to see something as extraordinary as God coming out of a cave is not likely going to be concerned with writing it down. In those times reading and writing was reserved for the educated, why would someone waste time telling it to pagans?
It was something reserved for the apostles, the documents you reject and yet, somehow, other documents would change your mind.. you just have a denial complex, and this is a part of it.

This is an argument in which atheists simply fail with. It shows how bleak their perception is on such matters.

 

[Hezekiah Holbrooke]

Okay. So what methods/results do you propose will settle the matter?



It depends on what you mean by "smarter". If "smarter" means that they have specialised knowledge in their particular field of study, then they are "smarter" in that regard at least. Because of that, their "guessing" is actually informed by their knowledge, which makes their "guessing" a lot "smarter" than the guessing of someone who lacks their educational background.

I really don't stay awake at night worrying that scientists are continuing to fight over the matter. It's enough for me to know that all these peoples exist. I really don't need to know their origins.

Yes, they are guessing or else they would know and all would be agreed upon that knowledge. One doesn't argue over known and settled facts.

 

[bhsmte]

2000 years ago, a 'historian' was very rare. Even then, the idea that one is going to see something as extraordinary as God coming out of a cave is not likely going to be concerned with writing it down. In those times reading and writing was reserved for the educated, why would someone waste time telling it to pagans?
It was something reserved for the apostles, the documents you reject and yet, somehow, other documents would change your mind.. you just have a denial complex, and this is a part of it.

This is an argument in which atheists simply fail with. It shows how bleak their perception is on such matters.

There were plenty of contemporary historians writing during the time of Jesus.

What I find interesting, is outside of the gospels, Jesus is rarely mentioned by any of them and only after long periods of time, do historians begin to mention him.

In looking at the gospels themselves, John which was penned by an anonymous author about 70 years after Jesus died, is the only gospel that mentions Jesus was divine. Matthew, Mark and Luke, were penned before John (also by anonymous authors) and failed to mention Jesus was divine. Why would those three gospels, miss such an important point about Jesus?

 

[bhsmte]

I really don't stay awake at night worrying that scientists are continuing to fight over the matter. It's enough for me to know that all these peoples exist. I really don't need to know their origins.

Yes, they are guessing or else they would know and all would be agreed upon that knowledge. One doesn't argue over known and settled facts.

Are you one that subscribes to the following:

If we don't know everything, we can't know anything?

 

[Hezekiah Holbrooke]

No. What about it?

What about it is that scientists are only guessing about the origin of the American Indian and fighting among themselves about it. It simply shows that on this issue, one's guess is just as good as is the next one's guess. Even mine.

 

[WindStaff]

What I find interesting, is outside of the gospels, Jesus is rarely mentioned by any of them and only after long periods of time, do historians begin to mention him.

That's because in old Judaism, speaking of God or the Heavens was considered blasphemy. This is why a lot of the biblical authors, like Isaiah, were persecuted.

They likely felt much trepidation even writing them in the first place.

 

[Hezekiah Holbrooke]

Are you one that subscribes to the following:

If we don't know everything, we can't know anything?

No, but neither do I worship a group of human men the way a lot of people do.

 

[bhsmte]

No, but neither do I worship a group of human men the way a lot of people do.

Worship?

 

[NewOrthodoxDenomination1]

Could you list these documents written by contemporary historians during Jesus' time that discuss him and specifically mention the resurrection?

Here are some ancient historians who wrote about the Resurrection. You can find the exact documents yourself with a little Google power: Josephus, Clement, Papias, Didache, Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Hermas, Tatian, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria.

 

[bhsmte]

Here are some ancient historians who wrote about the Resurrection. You can find the exact documents yourself with a little Google power: Josephus, Clement, Papias, Didache, Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Hermas, Tatian, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria.

When were these writings penned and what did they say about the resurrection?

 

[Davian]

What about it is that scientists are only guessing about the origin of the American Indian and fighting among themselves about it. It simply shows that on this issue, one's guess is just as good as is the next one's guess. Even mine.

Which goalposts are you referring to? The accuracy of DNA testing for the purposes of law enforcement, or its practical application regarding ancient genealogies?

 

[Hezekiah Holbrooke]

Which goalposts are you referring to? The accuracy of DNA testing for the purposes of law enforcement, or its practical application regarding ancient genealogies?

Try these:

All human life began 200,000 years ago in Africa and a woman scientists called Eve.

Where did the American Indian originate?

Scientist #1: From Egypt
Scientist #2: From Mongolia
Scientist #3: From Asia
Scientist #4: From a Pacific Island.

But scientists all know for a fact that all human life originated from Africa's Eve?

Scientists: Yes, all human life originated from Eve in Africa over 200,000 years ago.

But you still can't say for certain from where the American Indian came from?

Science: Well, they all came from Africa's Eve some 200,000 years ago.

Really? But you don't even know from where the American Indian came even much more recently than 200,000 years.

Science: All life began from a single cell.

Really? Even the American Indian?

LOL!!

 

[Davian]

Try these:

All human life began 200,000 years ago in Africa and a woman scientists called Eve.

Where did the American Indian originate?

Scientist #1: From Egypt
Scientist #2: From Mongolia
Scientist #3: From Asia
Scientist #4: From a Pacific Island.

But scientists all know for a fact that all human life originated from Africa's Eve?

Scientists: Yes, all human life originated from Eve in Africa over 200,000 years ago.

But you still can't say for certain from where the American Indian came from?

Science: Well, they all came from Africa's Eve some 200,000 years ago.

Really? But you don't even know from where the American Indian came even much more recently than 200,000 years.

Science: All life began from a single cell.

Really? Even the American Indian?

LOL!!

I too am laughing out loud at your example, but I am not laughing with you. Where did you get that stuff?

Have you ever read a scientific book on biology?