How can you literally believe...

[Saint Frankenstein]

To get this thread back on topic:

I came to the conclusion a few years back that it's a psychological issue; one that's based upon an individual's egotistical approach to themselves, their families and ancestors.

Sounds mean, and I usually think that psychoanalysis of people I've met and haven't met is a kind of ***** act in most contexts, but this is a religious forum that should accommodate such a thing. And I think I remember see an actual psychological study years back that indicated such a thing.

Something along the lines of a self talk that sounds like: "my grandfather was a great man - how dare anyone call his beliefs false!"

Maybe. I think it's also a cultural thing. Certain narratives have held sway in our culture for over a thousand years and such things tend to not be questioned, or questioned rarely.

 

[Nietzsche]

More like I'm sick of people bringing it up as if it's really any of their business and we're such good friends, so I owe them an explanation. Plus it's derailing the thread.

..do..do you know where you are? If you didn't want the history of your belief systems to matter, I've got some bad news. It's a Religious Forum. How you think & feel about various belief systems is the entire point.

 

[Spiderman]

I share in your frustration....God is cruel!

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I share in your frustration....God is cruel!

Certain concepts of God, for sure.

 

[Deidre]

When I left Christianity a few years ago, I remember wanting to tell my Christian friends that what they believed was ''false,'' and ''wrong,'' and a number of other things. Because *I* no longer believed, I wanted to denounce their beliefs, and lead them to 'the light.' lol I wasn't mean about it or anything, but I do remember feeling angry about what I had believed then, and wanted to get my friends to see what I saw. Online, and offline. Coming back to faith last year, my faith, while I identify as a Christian, it's not the same faith as a few years ago, it's a belief in Jesus, and His love. I don't take all of the Bible literally, but there are many who do. I feel like I have more freedom now to express my views having left faith, then returning to it, than I did if I hadn't left it at all. We're all on different paths, I just encourage people to leave faith or embrace it, whatever their faith choices, for the right reasons. That's all.

 

[Psychedelic Shop]

How can you believe things like a man coming back from the dead, bringing a corpse back to life, walking on water, instantly healing the sick and disabled, changing the weather, ascending to heaven (did he float up into the air or what?), etc. literally happened, as historical events?

Seriously. This perplexes me. If someone was literally doing that stuff, it would be the biggest thing in the history of the world. Corpses coming back to life and walking around! But the only writings about are mythological writings from Christians, decades later at best. No one else noticed? Everyone just forgot? That's just irrational. If you make the claims that those things literally happened, I would expect some rather amazing evidence. But, we have nothing. What's going on here?

Now, if you take these things as metaphor or otherwise non-literally, that's fine, but this thread isn't di

How can you believe things like a man coming back from the dead, bringing a corpse back to life, walking on water, instantly healing the sick and disabled, changing the weather, ascending to heaven (did he float up into the air or what?), etc. literally happened, as historical events?

Seriously. This perplexes me. If someone was literally doing that stuff, it would be the biggest thing in the history of the world. Corpses coming back to life and walking around! But the only writings about are mythological writings from Christians, decades later at best. No one else noticed? Everyone just forgot? That's just irrational. If you make the claims that those things literally happened, I would expect some rather amazing evidence. But, we have nothing. What's going on here?

Now, if you take these things as metaphor or otherwise non-literally, that's fine, but this thread isn't directed towards that crowd.

People don't know better. We can only base things off of what we already know.

For most the best understanding they have is the same as there parents.

The truth does have to be presented to them but only by questioning what they believe not by judgment and ridicule.

 

[RedDragon94]

If someone was literally doing that stuff, it would be the biggest thing in the history of the world. Corpses coming back to life and walking around! But the only writings about are mythological writings from Christians, decades later at best. No one else noticed? Everyone just forgot? That's just irrational. If you make the claims that those things literally happened, I would expect some rather amazing evidence. But, we have nothing. What's going on here?

I don't mean to insult your intelligence, but what if the Bible is actually eyewitness account (written before radio and TV were even conceived) instead of mythology? Does that change anything? (I bet you'll answer no anyways. )

As far as the Apostles forgetting what happened, we have what we need as far as knowing who Jesus is even if we don't have all the details of his life. The Gospels cover what's important.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I don't think witnesses from that time can still be alive now to tell, and there were no long term recording methods available at the time to authenticate it other than writings and narrations. But we know for sure that the vast majority of humans now are Christians, and there is a reason for that. This at least could imply that those did happen and their sight and writing were inherited generation by generation, since these two methods were the only two available back then and had been for a long time.

I'm not Christian, but I believe they did happen. Not by the power of Jesus, but with the power of God bestowed upon him for the specific occasions in which they happened. I don't believe Jesus had/has the power to do those at pure well. I do respect believing he did/does tho.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Thanks. I'm sure I'll be able to relate since I took much the same journey.

I've watched that series (at least the deconversion part). It was interesting.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I don't mean to insult your intelligence, but what if the Bible is actually eyewitness account (written before radio and TV were even conceived) instead of mythology? Does that change anything? (I bet you'll answer no anyways. )

As far as the Apostles forgetting what happened, we have what we need as far as knowing who Jesus is even if we don't have all the details of his life. The Gospels cover what's important.

You think the Bible is a written, eyewitness account?

 

[PeteC-UK]

Hi Folks..

Ah - such confusion...My mate knew it would be so, so He left us ample guidance - but its not to be found in the Bible Folks -that is twisted truth there......As always HE ALONE says it best - so here He is speaking directly and originaly, to Thomas :

"Look, the sower went out, took a handful of seeds, and scattered them. Some fell on the road, and the birds came and gathered them. Others fell on rock, and they didn't take root in the soil and didn't produce heads of grain. Others fell on thorns, and they choked the seeds and worms ate them. And others fell on good soil, and it produced a good crop: it yielded sixty per measure and one hundred twenty per measure."

Thats about this conversation Folks - and others like it..Religious confusion...He says there is TRUTH that has been spread out before you now, and you all (mostly) are simply not ready to hear it....Some of you come like "birds" - take a little that you need then fly off again satisfied for now you think, but still in need and so keep returning....Others of you are like rock, hard and barren and this truth has no chance to take root within your closed hard minds... Some of you are spiteful - have "thorns" to repel the truth and choke it off so that only the "worms" are fed and satisfied...

And very rarely - the truth falls into good soil - an open and receptive Mind - and thus it is cultivated properly, allowed to grow and flourish and gives a return beyond your greatest expectations....

"I took my stand in the midst of the world, and in flesh I appeared to them. I found them all drunk, and I did not find any of them thirsty. My soul ached for the children of humanity, because they are blind in their hearts and do not see, for they came into the world empty, and they also seek to depart from the world empty. But meanwhile they are drunk. When they shake off their wine, then they will change their ways."

..As always - for those with ears to hear..........

 

[Parchment]

Print out and fill in as needed:

 

[GreenKepi]

There's 'plenty' of evidence “outside of the Bible”...that proves Christ's existence...

Just a few...which talk about Jesus from non-Christian sources:

First, both Josephus and Lucian indicate that Jesus was regarded as wise and His existence.

Second, Pliny, the Talmud, and Lucian imply He was a powerful and revered teacher.

Third, both Josephus and the Talmud indicate He performed miraculous feats.

Fourth, Tacitus, Josephus, the Talmud, and Lucian all mention that He was crucified. Tacitus and Josephus say this occurred under Pontius Pilate. And the Talmud declares it happened on the eve of Passover.

Fifth, there are references to the Christian belief in Jesus' resurrection in both Tacitus and Josephus.

Sixth, Josephus records that Jesus' followers believed He was the Christ, or Messiah.

And finally, both Pliny and Lucian indicate that Christians worshiped Jesus as God!

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Here is some empirical evidence I happened to have looked at recently

You've shown me this link and we discussed it before. Specifically the Ouija link which does not point to a single bit of firsthand study (let alone peer reviewable publicly released methodology) only third hand storytelling. That won't be evidence convincing anyone not already convinced. I liken the website to creation.com in that regard.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

How can you believe things like a man coming back from the dead, bringing a corpse back to life, walking on water, instantly healing the sick and disabled, changing the weather, ascending to heaven (did he float up into the air or what?), etc. literally happened, as historical events?

Seriously. This perplexes me. If someone was literally doing that stuff, it would be the biggest thing in the history of the world. Corpses coming back to life and walking around! But the only writings about are mythological writings from Christians, decades later at best. No one else noticed? Everyone just forgot? That's just irrational. If you make the claims that those things literally happened, I would expect some rather amazing evidence. But, we have nothing. What's going on here?

Now, if you take these things as metaphor or otherwise non-literally, that's fine, but this thread isn't directed towards that crowd.

Welcome back!

 

[George-ananda]

You've shown me this link and we discussed it before.

Actually the link was directed to for the 'Good Doctor' poster.

Specifically the Ouija link which does not point to a single bit of firsthand study (let alone peer reviewable publicly released methodology) only third hand storytelling. That won't be evidence convincing anyone not already convinced. I liken the website to creation.com in that regard.

Is that your take away from the whole website? As for your Ouija issue quantity, quality and consistency of evidence supporting the attraction of spirits under favorable psychic conditions has been shown by paranormal researchers and scores of anecdotal reports. As for some kind of peer-reviewable controlled study on all these many types of spontaneous and unpredictable phenomena that may not be possible. If you are looking for controlled studies, I would point to something like Dr. Gary Schwartz's triple blind tests of gifted mediums as an example of a controlled study yielding positive results.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I used to believe all that literally, but it's all I knew, it's how I was raised, and I was discouraged from reading opposing viewpoints and outsider material.
And then I stepped out into the world, realized how twisted the message I was told is, just how frequently and often I'd been lied to, had my faith shaken and challenged, and then I actually read the Bible and realized there was no way I could go on believing, worshiping, and cherishing a being who demanded such cruelty and bloodshed.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Actually the link was directed to for the 'Good Doctor' poster.

Oh, I'm sorry. I don't read Good Doctor at the moment so I didn't see it was a different conversation going on.

Is that your take away from the whole website?

Nope, it was just an example I remembered from a previous conversation. Expecting me to piece through the entire website and answer each link in kind, and all of its sources is not a fair request, any more than if I linked a creationist the entirety of TalkOrigins and told them to respond to all of it.

As for your Ouija issue quantity, quality and consistency of evidence supporting the attraction of spirits under favorable psychic conditions has been shown by paranormal researchers and scores of anecdotal reports.

I'm not interested in anecdotal reports or in calling anecdotal reports 'evidence.' Nor do I think 'favorable psychic conditions' are quantifiable in any meaningful way.

As for some kind of peer-reviewable controlled study on all these many types of spontaneous and unpredictable phenomena that may not be possible

If it has an impact on physical matter then that impact should be easily measured. But all we're reduced to is vague third-hand reports, interviews inseparable from cold reading, and inadequate 'blinding'.

I would point to something like Dr. Gary Schwartz's triple blind tests of gifted mediums as an example of a controlled study yielding positive results.

I'm pretty sure we've talked about this too, but to save some time here is a pretty detailed response of why most skeptics don't accept Schwartz's 'blind' studies. http://www.csicop.org/si/show/how_not_to_test_mediums_critiquing_the_afterlife_experiments

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If you are looking for controlled studies, I would point to something like Dr. Gary Schwartz's triple blind tests of gifted mediums as an example of a controlled study yielding positive results.

I looked, and all I could find were non-credible sources, information and background on the man, and links to articles that don't allow me access to even the abstract.

 

[George-ananda]

Oh, I'm sorry. I don't read Good Doctor at the moment so I didn't see it was a different conversation going on.


Nope, it was just an example I remembered from a previous conversation. Expecting me to piece through the entire website and answer each link in kind, and all of its sources is not a fair request, any more than if I linked a creationist the entirety of TalkOrigins and told them to respond to all of it.


I'm not interested in anecdotal reports or in calling anecdotal reports 'evidence.' Nor do I think 'favorable psychic conditions' are quantifiable in any meaningful way.


If it has an impact on physical matter then that impact should be easily measured. But all we're reduced to is vague third-hand reports, interviews inseparable from cold reading, and inadequate 'blinding'.


I'm pretty sure we've talked about this too, but to save some time here is a pretty detailed response of why most skeptics don't accept Schwartz's 'blind' studies. http://www.csicop.org/si/show/how_not_to_test_mediums_critiquing_the_afterlife_experiments

Well we are at an unsolvable impasse if you consider the csicop group to be a fair source of information.

Again, to judge the truth for ourselves we need to do homework studying the evidence and argumentation from all sides of any controversial issue.

It's up to you if you want to review the material I presented and I agree support and rebuttal is of too large a scope for an RF reply post. Arguments based on quantity, quality and consistence of evidence can not be short logical arguments.