HRG

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Magus55
What difference does that make? History books claim Columbus discovered America, and Cleopatra ruled Egypt. Now if the historical accounts of them are acceptable, why isn't the Bible? The Apostles saw Jesus perform miracles - just because miracles can't be explained by science, doesn't mean they aren't real.
[quote]

Let's forget for a moment the naturalistic explanations for the claims that the apostels saw miracles (we don't have the apostles here to testify under cross-examinations). Even then you cannot say that the apostles saw Jesus perform miracles; all you can say is that they had perceptions which were consistent with water-to-wine, the resurrection etc.

But if you propose the supernatural explanation for their perceptions that those alleged miracles actually happened, you must also admit the supernatural explanation that the miracles did not happen, but a trickster supernatural created the appearance that they happened. Instead of turning water molecules into wine molecules, he changed a few photons.

Another supernatural explanation would be a miraculous change in the memories of the apostles, so they thought they had seen miracles. Since we have no experience with the supernatural, we can't even say that one explanation is more plausible than the other.

That's the problem with the supernatural: it breaks the link between our perceptions and reality. The very concept of eyewitness requires

Regards,
HRG.

Dargo

I have a question for Magus. According to you, even though god already knows the answer in advance he is permited to do any cruel thing he wants to test his creations. Yet his creations despite their limited knowledge are not allowed to test him in any way. No matter how much we suffer, no matter how many perfectly valid reasons we might have to doubt his love or even his very existance, we lowly humans are not allowed to ask him to lift a finger to provide any evidence to help us believe he exists and he cares. Does this strike you as even remotely fair?

This is one of the things that caused me to lose my faith. I can remember many times pleading with god to at least tell me what he wanted from me. How can suffering teach anything if you don't even tell the students what you want them to learn?

Magus55

Everyone is guilty, haven't you learned that yet? ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Magus55

Asking Questions of God i don't think is a problem. Its when people say, i won't believe in God until he appears in my face, or makes me rich, or kills my enemy etc. etc. - that is testing God - sincerely asking God to help you understand something isn't testing Him its seeking His guidance.

And God did tell us what He wants us to learn - its in the Bible - you just don't like the Bible and don't believe its from God.

If a teacher is sick and leaves a substitute teacher in the class room, and then gives the students the textbook they are supposed to read, is it the teacher's fault if the students won't read the textbook because the teacher didn't physically hand it to them herself?

God (the teacher), left His Word ( the textbook) with few a dozen authors like Moses and the Apostles (substitutes) for us (students) to learn from. It's not God's fault that you don't trust that the Bible came from Him, and think the authors are trying to give you fake material that isn't actually from God.

winstonjen

Including god? All your arguments, and most religious ones are illogical, so god could have sinned and thus fall short of himself.

And what possible sin can newborn babies have commited? The 'sin' of being born human, despite the fact that they cannot CHOOSE to be human? How can one be 'guilty' of something they do not consciously choose?

BTW, argument by font size is invalid.

Isn't asking questions testing him as well, by seeing if he will respond or not?

Tenspace

Boy, are you going to be surprised. LOL

Tenspace

Enigma

Poor analogy.

God cannot get sick. Leaving the question:

Why would a perfect being trust a fallible messenger with a vital message?

Also, there are several groups of people claiming to be "substitutes" (Buddha, Mohammed, etc.) each of whom happen to have almost completely different textbooks (The Koran, the Vedas, etc.), and each of whom occasionally convince a group of students (adherents to one religion) to beat the crud out of other students (adherents to another religion) because the latter wont concede that the former's supported textbook (Holy Book) is the textbook that should be used (Holy Wars, Crusades, Jihads, etc).

Try again?

//riot of disorder::

Wow! You're so big, using capital letters to tell me my fate and eternal doom when I die, and which no one has ever seen!

BioBeing

Magus55 - I gotta ask.... are you here to try and turn people away from Christianity? Are you really an atheist in disguise?



I'm glad I'm not a Christian.

TomboyMom

I'm not even going to address how absurd and baseless these contentions are: just the tone. Note how all of these assertions are stated as facts? Not "my religion teaches..." or "I believe that..." or even "Christians believe that..." Just bald statements of "fact" with no basis: "God allows pain and suffering..." "God wants..." What I want to know, Magus55, is, who died and made you omniscient? You don't know what God wants, if there were a God. Stating your propositions as facts (especially to a group of atheists) greatly undermines your credibility. It is also massively, but typically, arrogant. (I mean typical of Christians.) I suggest you try stating them as beliefs.

Rene, ever helpful:banghead: