grendel prime

cat entered my post before i got to write any text...
anyway, given the current discussions on several other threads, i think that this topic may me useful. personally, if i were in the postion of the disciples, i would consider it logical (though not necessarity correct) to believe that Jesus were in fact the messiah if i were following the man around ad watching him perform all kinds of miracles. receiving second or third hand reports of those miracles from almost two thousand years ago is much less convincing for me. anyway thoughts on conditions for belief?

conversly, from the resident theists, what are your conditions for disbelief?

Cubeless Academian

For me to believe what?

Shven

Evidence that some of the things I've seen that cannot be explained by materialism aren't real.

Shven

grendel prime

btw, to keep it more relevant to the forum than my OP,

theists: what kind of extra biblical evidence would it take for you to cease (or even doubt) your belief that the bible is the inspired (or inerrant) word of god?
the discovery of a document signed by jesus claiming the whole thing was a joke? is there an expiration date for his second coming?

part of the reason atheists and theists talk past each seems to be that theists don't generaly hold any conditions for disbelief. that is, there is nothing that would cause them to loose their belief in the inspiration of the
bible or the christship of jesus. Is this true for atheists too? i don't think so, but...thoughts?

grendel prime

i agree. my post is simply a hypothetical. it seems to me that at this point theism actually becomes something like a skeptical hypothesis: it is impossible to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt (notice, not a reasonable doubt) that these two biblical passages do not contradict or that this prophecy was not fulfilled, therefore my belief is reasonable. theism just starts to look like a brain in a vat.

but, if Jesus had taught his disciples germ theory or drawn a map of all the continents to be included in all the gospels, i would find it more reasonable to believe in divine authorship and all that jazz. as far as something that can happen in the actual world to support the claims of christianity, i would think something like his modern day disciples raising the dead on a regular basis, while not sufficient evidence, would make belief more rational...

Godless Wonder

The "miracles" Jesus performed -- even if true -- don't seem to me to indicate that he was the creator of the entire universe. He multiplied a few loaves, cured some people, walked on water, came back from the "dead", killed a fig tree in a tantrum ... all well within the abilities of any minor deity worthy of the name. I don't see any indication that he was the creator of the universe in there other than his say so -- which, if you read carefully -- he didn't really say so, or kind of beat around the bush on that one a little bit.. Seems like the real creator of the universe could come up with some better miracles than this handful of parlour tricks. Raise a mountain, knock it down with the edge of his hand, make a second moon, rearrange the stars, that sort of thing.

grendel prime

there is definately a big gap between claiming that Jesus had "supernatural" powers and him being god incarnate. but would his or his subsequent disciple's ability to raise the dead count as evidence for chritianity in any way?

got an apointment, be back in a bit

pkurilla

For years, I've been telling people that all it would take for me to believe is for a penny to appear ex nihilo in the palm of my hand, and a voice booming thunderously loud across the city, so that all 2 million people can hear it, saying "XXXX Church is the closest to My teachings."

And I've given my own word that should such ever happen, I'll gladly donate $100 immediately to the church named.

I don't think I ask for too much.

Vorkosigan

What methodology allows you to determine that the dead were indeed raised?

Amaleq13

I agree and that is one reason why I have serious doubts about the historical reliability of the Gospel stories. After allegedly witnessing all that and allegedly being explicitly told that he would rise after three days, they are depicted as not believing the women when they report an empty tomb!

The Hebrew Bible is no better. After allegedly witnessing all those amazing miracles during their escape from Egypt, the first thing they do as soon as Moses leaves is start worshipping a different god? :huh:

I've mentioned elsewhere that it would take a pretty significant event that had no plausible natural explanation for me to ignore my life-experience and embrace the claims of any religion. That really wouldn't require faith, though, so I guess it doesn't count.

When it comes down to it, I do not consider "faith" to be a reliable basis for conclusions so only a tremendously powerful subjective experience is likely to change that view. This is why many of my theist friends pray that God will provide a direct revelation to me.