Why is Faith a Virtue?

Not "everything else in life" is "held to a higher standard." Moral codes, for example, are not held to a higher standard.Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.

This is what anthropologists and psychologists do. Again, this is what anthropologists and psychologists do. Also historians, biographers, writers etc..The aim of the exercise is comprehension, not judgement.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

They do? They think to themselves, "Maybe racism is not evil after all. Maybe it's good"?

No, you're equating empathy with sympathy.

I thought you were talking about evidence or the lack thereof.

.This doesn't deal with the fact that I was at that stage much like you are now. I didn't care that God be real. I hadn't given any thought to the consequences of him being real. Even now, 5 years on, I spend the majority of my time forgetting about the consequences of him being real. Back then I was in the process of finding out that God is real - which is a different thing altogether. No desparation or forcing or any such thing. I was just interested in what it was happening to me.True, it was desparation that made me cry out to the only solution left (not that I believed he existed - how could I - but rather that all other avenues had been exhausted) but it wasn't desparation that made me read the Bible or check it out further in other ways. Understanding mechanisms isn't subjective. If the parts don't fit the mechanism doesn't work. The Bible is not out and out mechanical - but it is very mechanical nonetheless. I was checking this 'thing' (as I would have referred to it then) out and the phrase which repeatedly crossed my mind was: "it fits". It makes sense of the world as one large mechanism. That was my entry point in, I'm sure others entry points in will suit their own personal handleI don't have to understand all the intricate details to see how the mechanism works no more than I have to understand the crystalline nature of cast iron in order to watch a cast iron gear being rotated by a cast iron crank Hopefully the above will stay that particular form of execution And? In order to come to that conclusion one must presumably be able to recognise symbolism, metaphor and parable. Which allows one to recognise the occasions when this is not the case. The Bible isn't only about teaching but teach it does. In ways nothing else can, history teaches us. Mans problem is that the faith he places in himself in himself and his powers renders him seldom prepared to be taught by history. Hence the expression: history repeating itself.I take it you would have no problem with God being able to perform acts like the flood or parting the Red Sea. But you see, he says that people are blinded and cannot see things that are there to be seen. You place great stead in science to explain how things are but you presume that it tells you the close-enough-to-absolute truth about things. If the Bible is correct then science though not at all useless should not be considered a god. It is, in the scheme of things, a blind mans white stick. The belief isn't at all blind. It has more evidence that I could shake a stick at. But yours is blind disbelief. If it happened (Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead) then there is no problem in the testimony - no one would mistake such a thing. If it didn't, then it is a lie that someone propagated somewhere along the line. And "if innocent until motive for guilt is established" then happen it did until there is compelling reason to argue otherwise. There is no logical problem with it. Just accept (for there is no reason not to) or reject.I have said often enough that that which results in a persons damnation is their rejecting of the gospel. What you are doing is a perfect example of it. When faced with him and asked why you rejected (for he doesn't leave you completely without a call in his direction) you will find you had no good, solid reason to reject it:"I didn't believe miracles happen" you might tell him. "They do, as you now know" He will reply. "And I had people testify to you that they did happen - you just didn't believe it was me speaking through the Bible (even though Faith and Iano - who had no reason to lie to you - told you that that was the case), You could have believed or disbelieved the Bibles testimoney or their testimoney. You chose disbelief"There is no reason to disbelieve. And no reason in your mind, to believe. Yet you plump for disbelief.Its not like you have anything to lose by believing. If you don't get any evidence then you'll know that its all baloney. Or that your not ready to believe yet...Edited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Does not follow. It could still be a lie! "...so I'm going to send you to hell!"What a pathetic creature this God of yours is.

quote:

---

The Jews who were there who didn't believe explained away the miracles. That's in the Bible.

---

But they reported that something happened, yes?Shouldn't there be sources outside the Bible where these "somethings" that happened were reported if they really did happen, no matter who claimed "responsibility" for them?If "thousands" actually witnessed them, as you claim?

quote:

---

Later denigrating things were said about Jesus and His followers in the Talmud. Besides that, a couple of Roman philosophers mentioned the existence of the Christian sect. Tacitus I believe was one. They weren't there at the time. They heard something about it and didn't believe it and didn't treat it as important, and said denigrating things about the believers.

---

Haha, this sounds like some of that "secondhand eyewitness testimony" that you consider so important.So, how do you know that those Romans were lying?

quote:

---

Excuse me? Are you thinking at all? Just making everything up? At least a hundred thousand, maybe hundreds of thousands of Jews believed in Jesus and that's before the gospel was preached outside Jerusalem. When it went out to the Gentiles it gathered in many hundreds of thousands more. I suppose many millions otherwise didn't believe but I don't know what the population of the Roman Empire was at the time.

---

The point is, if "many millions" literally observed these occurrences without believing, surely some of them would have reported and/or written down that strange things were happening, wouldn't they, even if they didn't attribute the goings on to Jesus and his followers?If that many people saw these things happen, shouldn't there be many reports from outside the Bible?

quote:

---

Lots and lots of writings by believers. Very little mention by unbelievers.

---

Right.Which means that the events you say happened in front of many thousands of people, even millions, probably didn't happen at all or perhaps only in front of a few people.For example, the Romans kept extremely accurate astronomical records, but there is no Roman record of anything unusual happening in the sky like it says in Luke.: Furthermore, even if I accept your notion of a vast conspiracy among the Roman astronomers, and the Chinese astronomers, and the Arab atronomers, and the Mayan and Incan astronomers, and the Celtic astronomers, why isn't this amazing sun-darkening mentioned in any of the other Gospels?I mean, surely that would have impressed the other authors? Surely they wouldn't have just forgotten such an amazing occurrence?Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Sure, why not? We are talking about witness reports to events I assume. Of course I would regard them as valid.

---

I see your paltry 66 authors and raise you to 760 authors. Steve's List

quote:

---

Is that what you call the newspaper reports of events you didn't witness yourself? TV reports? All histories? Sure, "hearsay" of that sort.

---

Funny, I didn't realize that the Bible was the product of professional journalists.Also, I can fact-check the newspaper articles and TV reports that I see if I care to. I can look up photographs, video clips, sound files, interviews, and other original sources which have been recorded.There is also a sliding scale of acceptance I give to various sources with regards to their reliability and impartiality.Impartiality and journalistic integrity are important. A good reporter just reports the facts and perhaps provides some analysis, and does not try to further a cause or spin the events.Are you claiming that all 66 writers of the Bible were impartial reporters and were not trying to promote their beliefs?Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

The analogy was only intended to demonstrate that we all have to depend on secondhand or "hearsay" reports all the time, not to claim that they're all inerrant.

---

But you ARE claiming that the Bible IS inerrant based upon your analogy of hearsay evidence being just as reliable as any other kind.

Hell foundationally can just be a place where you don't get to be around God. "Your will be done" - as it were. You don't want him? Fair enough. So you don't get the good things he offers either: no joy in your existance, no peace, no warmth, no pleasure, no love. That might seem like punishment but these are things he gives us - you wouldn't argue that the ability to enjoy the warmth of the sun on your skin was enabled by your own actions. It seems fair to me that if you don't want him then you cannot expect blessings from him.Perhaps you are taking all these nice things as your rights.As for active punishment (as opposed to taking away that which you do not want - his blessing). You do accept that law breaking should be punished - don't you? Or have you a justice-system-in-my-own-image-and-likeness nestled alongside the god system you holdEdited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Well, it's not a lot but what little there is is significant. I've just started the book, but I recall that though there is no independent mention of David or Solomon there has been found an inscription with a reference to Davidic kings.There is also the well known information that Jerusalem was a village. The temple and palaces of Solomon are like the legendary Camelot a product of creating a glorious golden age, not strictly imaginary but highly exagerated.I'll say more as I find time to read the book.lfen

No, because it's caused my skin receptors responding to heat radiation from the sun. Perhaps I have no desire to subject myself to the judgement of a petty, vindictive tyrant-god who demands unquestioning obediance whilst providing plenty of ways for humans to "delude" themselves into rejecting him.Or, perhaps I have no desire to live my life like a child in fear of punishment.Sorry Ian, your beliefs are your own, but your idea of God leaves me utterly cold.

I was perfectly clear. DO not avoid the question.