Dargo

Most of us former Christians would not have lost our faith if we had seen even a fraction of the evidence that Thomas was supposedly given. Thomas wouldn't believe his friends telling him that Jesus rose from the dead despite seeing Jesus perform great miracles, but we are expected to believe some dubious ancient authors. Of course, if we try to follow Thomas's example, Christians will just say how arrogant it is to expect god to cater to our whims.

copernicus

Enfield, I read the article--"The Gospel for Skeptics" by Rev. Mark Creech. I think that you missed the point if you think that he was trying to use the Bible to convince skeptics. That wasn't his argument, and skeptics weren't his true audience. Consider the following appeal to "skeptics":

He then went on to invoke Mel Gibson's morbid fantasy of Christ being methodically tortured to death by faithless Jews and Romans. As a skeptic, I found Creech's argument to be completely off the mark, but he wasn't addressing his remarks to me. He was addressing his remarks to himself and other christians who harbor secret doubts. He was trying to help his audience of believers to deal with the imaginary skeptic that lurks in their minds, constantly hounding them with doubts. Having read his essay, I doubt (there I go again ) that Rev. Creech has actually ever had a conversation with a real skeptic. His target is those who feel that their faith is going a little wobbly.

Here is another interesting passage:

Fascinating. He seems to understand that there is something wrong with the logic of his argument, and he appeals to his audience not to take it as an attack on reason. He implicitly acknowledges that none of it makes much sense without the deity actually doing something to provide a religious experience. Not having been provided that religious experience, I can honestly say that I don't feel any obligation to believe in his deity.

He concludes with a rather fascinating observation:

This reveals his true audience--those who are open to being convinced of his vision. By nature, true skeptics are not predisposed to believe such things, but he is really talking to the suppressed skepticism of those who are predisposed to believe it. The true doubting Thomas was supposedly only open to empirical proof. Creech is speaking to those who don't require that level of proof. He is exhorting them to keep that nagging doubt well boxed in. He is not giving doubters reason to believe, but believers reason not to doubt.

Annoyed

Copernicus wrote:

"Fascinating. He seems to understand that there is something wrong with the logic of his argument, and he appeals to his audience not to take it as an attack on reason. He implicitly acknowledges that none of it makes much sense without the deity actually doing something to provide a religious experience. Not having been provided that religious experience, I can honestly say that I don't feel any obligation to believe in his deity."

Hammer, meet nail head. You've arrived at the crux of the whole matter-- revelation by God, and I'd like to comment about that as my first post here.

Jesus, in a conversation with his disciples recorded in Matthew 16: 13-17 discusses this:


13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

It seems that there was quite a debate among men as to exactly who Jesus was. But Peter was certain that Jesus was the Christ, and it was Jesus who explains that the way Peter knew this was by direct revelation of God.

This belief can't be arrived at by argument or wonderful oratory skills. It can't be physically beaten into someone, nor can a person be shamed into it, cajoled into it, bribed into it, cried into it, begged into it, or shot into it by cannon.

If I, by wonderful oration manage to convince a person of God's existence and the personhood of Jesus the Christ, he may temporarily appear to be converted, but without the revelation of God his "faith" won't last, and in fact never was.

Since I came to believe without anyone preaching to me or guiding me, I never argue with or try to convince people as to my faith. God is invisible, His kingdom is invisible, and the only way to "see" it is if He draws the person to Himself.

I hope he'll draw you.

Steven Carr

Because if he doesn't, you'll go to Hell.

Adora

(edited)

Invisible Pink Unicorn argument.

Amaleq13

"recorded"? "Created" is more like it.

Really? What about the time Peter watched Jesus heal Peter's mother-in-law? That had no bearing on his conclusion? Jesus had also already told Peter and the other disciples they were to go out to perform healings and other miracles (including raising the dead!). But it still took a divine revelation for Peter to figure it out?

Perhaps the author of Mark is only being truthful in depicting Peter as an idiot.

If that is the case, then the life and death of Jesus as described in the Gospels would constitute a complete waste of time.

Postcard73

More of a GRD discussion, so off it goes...

Scott (Postcard73)
BC&H Moderator

copernicus

Welcome to the forum, Annoyed. We certainly agree on what the issue was in Rev. Creech's article. It wasn't an appeal to scripture, but to revelation. The truly odd thing about appeals to Christian revelation is that they never seem to happen to people who weren't brought up Christian. That suggests that the upbringing and the desire to have revelations is what causes them, not God. Indeed, religious rapture occurs to believers of other religions, as well, but it tends to confirm the belief system of their upbringing. Religious skeptics see the skewed distribution of professed revelations as objective evidence that gods do not exist.

The passage was "recorded" decades after the alleged death of Jesus, and it was the product of more alleged "revelation". Human history is full of false revelations from false gods, as I am sure you will agree. What you probably won't agree on is that this is more of the same old same old.

And this settled the matter? Such an argument suggests to me that none of the participants in the debate ought to have caved without themselves experiencing their own revelation. Didn't it occur to them that Peter could be making the whole thing up or genuinely deluded?

No, most of us would agree that it has nothing at all to do with logic or reasoning. It does seem, though, that Christians have tried all of those methods in the past and continue to pursue them vigorously to this day.

Too bad for all those who believe in stories of other people's revelations. It strikes me that this is seriously bad news for most practicing christians. It makes them little better than atheists and infidels, although they were hoping for better.

Are you being completely honest here? Aren't you sort of engaged in just a teensy bit of proselytizing? Doesn't this post as an attempt to "spread the message"?

Bingo. I'll wait for my revelation. I'm very pleased that you approve and accept my atheism in the meantime. I wish more christians were that understanding.

Heathen Dawn

Pascal’s Wager very effective in converting people to Christianity?! Actually, it’s one of the factors that’s preventing me from being a Christian (or Muslim). The Wager appeals to fear, it means might makes right, it’s the strongest proof that the system before you isn’t about spirituality, but about cold, cynical, hard-nosed business.

sharon45

The aspect of fear works very well, so also with greed.

Faith is very strong as well and the real point with John 20:24-29. Even though thomas had doubts, they were calmed by actually seeing jesus in person, but christianity knows well in advance this is not the case for converting and staying with the belief. The christian is offered really nothing but to rely on faith that the bible is true. Faith is used deceptively like it was a strength. Jesus gives this away in one of his contradictions "sheep among wolves".