1+1+1 = 1 ?
-
TCmc, if you want answers for religious stufff the buddhists have more to offer.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
1. Oldest manuscripts found for OLD TESTAMENT --- dead sea scrolls dated 150BCE which are not the originals
2. Oldest manuscripts found for NEW TESTAMENT --- fragments from 150CE. Earliest New Testament FULL scriptures are dated only in 400CE, which is 400 years after jesus' supposed death.
Yes VERY OLD scriptures have been found, but still there are NO ORIGINALS. I can agree that the OT has remained GENERALLY unchanged for 2100 years and the NT has remained unchanged for 1600 years. But still the fact remains that between the time of the originals and the time of these oldest manuscripts, there could have been changes made.
I guess we'll never know FOR SURE if the bibles we have are the same as the original ones unless someday the originals are found. If we can nv be sure, then we must leave space for skepticism.
Next....
But does a book proves the existence of an invisible being at work?
Does it mean if a book remains unchanged for a long time, it is a work of an invisible deity?
Then how do you know that the Carthaginian empire or the city of Pompeii ever existed, or that Qin Shi Huang unified China? Were you the ORIGINAL eye-witness to these events?
The point about historical research is to reconstruct what happened in the past through existing fragments of evidence and the study of socio-political events and culture, not to expect a nice and neat collection of original documentation from ancient times to be available today.
The Book alone doesn't tell me about the existence of God. The historical evidence that points to Jesus Christ having walked this earth more than 2000 years ago, together with the existence of the Church that can trace its roots from the time of Jesus till now AND the Book, tells me so.
-
Originally posted by Servant:
Then how do you know that the Carthaginian empire or the city of Pompeii ever existed, or that Qin Shi Huang unified China? Were you the ORIGINAL eye-witness to these events?
The point about historical research is to reconstruct what happened in the past through existing fragments of evidence and the study of socio-political events and culture, not to expect a nice and neat collection of original documentation from ancient times to be available today.
The Book alone doesn't tell me about the existence of God. The historical evidence that points to Jesus Christ having walked this earth more than 2000 years ago, together with the existence of the Church that can trace its roots from the time of Jesus till now AND the Book, tells me so.
at least these are more real than god. teracotta army is fake eh?
-
Originally posted by Servant:
Then how do you know that the Carthaginian empire or the city of Pompeii ever existed, or that Qin Shi Huang unified China? Were you the ORIGINAL eye-witness to these events?
The point about historical research is to reconstruct what happened in the past through existing fragments of evidence and the study of socio-political events and culture, not to expect a nice and neat collection of original documentation from ancient times to be available today.
The Book alone doesn't tell me about the existence of God. The historical evidence that points to Jesus Christ having walked this earth more than 2000 years ago, together with the existence of the Church that can trace its roots from the time of Jesus till now AND the Book, tells me so.
Servant, I think you failed to read our discussions properly.
I say more evidence is needed for the bible because the bible claims "supernatural" things in it like healings, ascending into the heavens etc.
Pompeii records, newton/edison/einstien writings do not make claims that they are gods or that they ascended into the heavens. And people have found the remains of Pompeii and original writings of the scientists.
Just like what Rooney said, teracotta army, Pompeii are all real and physical and visible. THe originals are all there.
As for the bible, it has made MANY supernatural claims, which have yet to be proven.
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
TCmc, if you want answers for religious stufff the buddhists have more to offer.
Buddhism don't offer more answers..................becoz there's no such thing as answers...............
it tells people WHAT they truly are.................not ''who'' as there's no identity..............
it also tells people how physical reality is an illusion...............
-
Originally posted by Susanteo2011:
Buddhism don't offer more answers..................becoz there's no such thing as answers...............
it tells people WHAT they truly are.................not ''who'' as there's no identity..............
it also tells people how physical reality is an illusion...............
Whatever, at least they are able to answer all that I asked for unlike christianity.
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
Whatever, at least they are able to answer all that I asked for unlike christianity.
of course................must understand that Jesus is just a made-up character.................so everything in the bible is mostly bullcrap..............
-
Originally posted by winsomeea:
Whatever, at least they are able to answer all that I asked for unlike christianity.
no they got answers, but not satisfactory and convincing and rationale and coherent, thats all.
-
Servant
So I hope you are able to distinguish between a religious book and historical records of pompeii, einstien and edison.
A religious book often (whether hindu, christian, muslim) makes supernatural claims (transfiguration, ascension, healings, miracles).
Yes there are ways to authenticate PLACES and PEOPLE mentioned in religious books. But what I am interested is --- IS THERE A WAY to authenticate the supernatural claims?
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
Servant
So I hope you are able to distinguish between a religious book and historical records of pompeii, einstien and edison.
A religious book often (whether hindu, christian, muslim) makes supernatural claims (transfiguration, ascension, healings, miracles).
Yes there are ways to authenticate PLACES and PEOPLE mentioned in religious books. But what I am interested is --- IS THERE A WAY to authenticate the supernatural claims?
No, there is no way. You are correct. I am wrong.
That's what you and the others want to hear right?
Have a great day ahead!
-
Servant
I am only saying that there's a difference bwteen a religious book and an official historical record.
I did not say I am correct or that you're wrong. I am asking you as a christian, to authenticate the supernatural claims of ascension, resurrection and healings in your bible.
Why do you skip the question?
Please help me out by attempting to prove the miracles in the bible. Thanks.
-
tcmc,
i tink i replied u b4 tat for the miracles they are ''proven'' based on the belief tat the bible is accurately recorded. so if one believes tat the ''fotostated'' copies of the bible are accurate then the content in it including the miracles recorded will also be accurate...
-
if the miracles were witnessed by the disciples and recorded by them, then nw the originals are lost, do u tink there will stil be originals for the miracles??? the 2 qns u asked are actually interlinked in a sense...
-
Hi Despondent,
I think you didnt see the next question I posted to you earlier ----->
Yes VERY OLD scriptures have been found, but still there are NO ORIGINALS. I can agree that the OT has remained GENERALLY unchanged for 2100 years and the NT has remained unchanged for 1600 years. But still the fact remains that between the time of the originals and the time of these oldest manuscripts, there could have been changes made.
I guess we'll never know FOR SURE if the bibles we have are the same as the original ones unless someday the originals are found. If we can nv be sure, then we must leave space for skepticism.
Next question....
But does a book proves the existence of an invisible being at work?
Does it mean if a book remains unchanged for a long time, it is a work of an invisible deity?
Does it mean if a book remains unchanged for a long time, the miracles in it are real? What is the link?
-
the argument is tat for over 40 authors to write similar accounts over diff timezone, diff countries and diff languages without ever having access to each other's writings is far too coincidental...so it can only be reasonably argued tat there is a supreme being behnd all these who ensured such consistency...i wun go into the arguments whether there is indeed consistency cos thats another huge theological discussion...
so since such consistency points at a supreme being being behind it, then the miracles in these writings have to be true UNLESS we want to claim tat this supreme being is one who lies and tat the authors were lying abt their accounts...but if they were lying, could they possibly write the same lie without any collaboration? possible but to the theologians nt very reasonble as the chances are very very small...
Servant said tat to noe if a deity exist, u dun juz rely on a book, theres also the personal experiences and historical evidence...like for eg, the independence of Israel...one author wrote tat Israel will one day be independent and this was recorded over a thousand years in the bible....Israel was independent only in 1948AD...so the qn is how did the author noe tat Israel will be an independent state in future??? coincidence? the 4 gospels recorded jesus saying that in the last days more n more disasters will befall earth then the end will come...this was written by the disciples almost 2000yrs ago and history will show tat in recent yrs disasters are getting more n more frequent...
the above are juz 2 egs i can remember offhand...its wif evidence like these along wif personal experiences and the consistency over the yrs in the writings tat points(nt to the extent of proof) to an intelligent designer who exists...
-
1. You said 40 authors writing similar accounts. Who are these 40 authors writing similar accounts? The only similar accounts are the ones by matt, mark, luke, john. Even among these 4 gospels, there are a number of inconsistencies. Also, there are major inconsistencies when comparing the old testament and new testament. If you want me to point out these inconsistencies I can.
2. So if similar accounts gets passed down over a long period of time proves a God at work, then the Hindu Scriptures, Quran, Sikh Scriptures all prove their respective Gods right? I am following your logic. And the other religions' texts have all also been preserved and passed down over thousands of years.
3. You said experiences also validate a God. Previously sgdiehard also said the same thing. Then I questioned him if the Hindu's, Muslim's and Sikh's experiences with their Gods also validate their Gods but he did not answer me. Again, I am following your logic.
Please address these 3 points and tell me what you think.
Also adress below question ---
Generally, your 2 reasons for the existence of your God is --
1. Consistency of text passed down through the years
2. Personal experiences, miracles
But these reasons are also given by Sikhs, Hindus, Taoists, Muslims, Polytheists, Animists, Spirtualists to validate their Gods.
What makes your reasons different from theirs?
-
u left out one reason...the historical evidence tat coincides wif wad the authors wrote thousands of years back...i do have a book tat explains why there wasnt inconsistencies which i bought several yrs back...it was written by a theologian who have studied the bible in several languages including hebrew and greek(the original languages of the bible)...if we really wan to noe abt whether the bible is consistent, we cannot look at it by reading jus the English version...a proper study in Hebrew and Greek is needed...
btw, God is defined by christians as higher being and the Creator...so any religion which do not believe in creation are holding a diff definition from the christians and muslims...to them, God is defined as higher being only...
then comes the part abt r/s...is r/s sth tat was created or it juz exist??? christians believe tat r/s is sth tat was created by the creator...nw, does it make sense tat the creator created r/s on earth but He himself is nt a relational God? in Islam, the focus is nt on having a r/s wif Allah, its abt following his teachings and doing gd...u get to heaven by gd works nt by having a r/s wif Allah...in fact, Islam teaches tat Allah is God and although he is God, he is nt relational or knowable by his followers...
Man wanted to fly so he created airplanes(Wright Brothers)...man wanted to see in the dark so he created the light bulb(edison)...these are egs tat the very nature of creation is tat the creator will create wad he desires...so the fact that r/s were part of creation, it would to the creator being someone who desires r/s...would a non-relational creator desire r/s???
i have nvr gone this far to discuss and share wad i noe...i share this wif u cos i can see tat u are keen n willing to noe...hope i have helped...:)
-
despondent,
1. About the inconsistencies, yes I am talking about the modern english bibles of today. That is the bible most christians use today and there are inconsistences in the english versions.
despondent,
I know you're trying to be helpful here BUT It seems like you know very little about other religions and that you are assuming FOR THEM a lot of things.
1. You assume that Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs do not believe in a Creator God. You're wrong. They all do believe that their Gods are Creators of the whole universe and also the only God,. similar to the Christian God.
2. You also assume that Muslims do not value the relationship with their God. Speak to devout Muslims and they will tell you they love their God as much as you do love Jesus.
So now that you know their Gods are similar to yours tell me, What makes your reasons different from theirs?
Generally, your 2 reasons for the existence of your God is --
1. Consistency of text passed down through the years
2. Personal experiences, miracles
But these reasons are also given by Sikhs, Hindus, Taoists, Muslims, Polytheists, Animists, Spirtualists to validate their Gods.
-
no...u missed my pt...my pt is nt whether the muslims love their God...is Islam abt having a r/s wif God? also, i read in a book tat Allah does nt love all man...He only loves those who follow him...one thing u may want to consider is among these religious books, which is the oldest? the books may record the same info but shld nt the oldest one be the one tat is original? Islam was founded in 632AD way after christianity...so even if it records the same events and occurrences, did it copy from christianity or other religions before it? Buddha lived before jesus was born BUT the Old testament existed b4 buddha...i do not noe all religions equally well...
one qn i have for u...do u believe in creation by a SINGLE creator? tis has to be established 1st b4 we can carry on...
-
to add on, do u believe tat God is defined as Creator as well and nt juz higher being cos buddha is a higher being but definitely nt creator...
-
In all major religions, there are miracles and good testimonies of believers' actually happy or cured of their illness etc....why is that possible ?
I think the human collective consciousness is more important....if many people believe in the same thing for the greater good, miracles will happen ! Irregardless of which religion you choose....as long as you believe wholeheartedly, good things will happen....
-
despondent,
1. You fail to see from the other religions' Point Of View. You only keep insisting that people to look at your point of view but why dont you want to look at other people's point of view?
Yes to you, the trinity/Jesus is the true God and that YOU have a true relationship with God Creator.
But to the Muslim, Allah is the true God and that HE has a true relationship with God Creator who is Allah.
To the Sikh, the Sikh God the true God and that HE has a true relationship with God Creator who is "Ik Onkar"
To the Hindu, Lord Brahma is the true God and that HE has a true relationship with God Creator who is Lord Brahma
Every religion claims there religious book/God is true .
So now I am asking you, what makes your belief/God/scripture different from theirs? Please answer.
2. So your logic is - THe older the religion, the more true it is? Then Buddhism must be more true than Christianity because Buddhism is older. :) So does your logic make sense? Answer too.
To answer your question - No I dont believe in any Gods, and that includes the Christian God, Hindu God, Muslim God etc.
-
despondent
pls answer the 2 qns i have for you thanks
-
buddhism is nt older than christianity(depends when u consider christiantiy to have started)...does the quran say tat the essence of Islam is to have a r/s wif God? do the other religions say tat the essence of the religion is to have a r/s wif the deity of the religion? or do they say t5at its abt karma, doing gd etc...christianity is different cos salvation is by grace and nt gd works...gd works is juz a manifestation of ur salvation...its impt and gd but nt for getting to heaven...
i have to say tis...if u do nt come from a creationist mindset, it will be hard for u to accept creationistic religions....if u take an atheist stand, then our discussion shld end here cos its going to be apple-orange argument all the way...u cun discuss anything without a common platform to start wif...how can i play tennis wif someone on a tennis court if he is on a golf course playing golf??? hope u noe wad i mean...
-
Originally posted by despondent:
buddhism is nt older than christianity(depends when u consider christiantiy to have started)...does the quran say tat the essence of Islam is to have a r/s wif God? do the other religions say tat the essence of the religion is to have a r/s wif the deity of the religion? or do they say t5at its abt karma, doing gd etc...christianity is different cos salvation is by grace and nt gd works...gd works is juz a manifestation of ur salvation...its impt and gd but nt for getting to heaven...
i have to say tis...if u do nt come from a creationist mindset, it will be hard for u to accept creationistic religions....if u take an atheist stand, then our discussion shld end here cos its going to be apple-orange argument all the way...u cun discuss anything without a common platform to start wif...how can i play tennis wif someone on a tennis court if he is on a golf course playing golf??? hope u noe wad i mean...
I find Christians more defensive when they talk about their beliefs....buddhists are more open minded...i think....why har ?
