|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is faith the answer to cognitive dissonance? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: I'm sort of surprised about that. I can remember stories of Hindu statues drinking milk, Chrisitans claiming that gold fillings had miraculously appeared in their teeth, Catholics claiming miracles for their saints. Really, you've heard none of these ?
quote: Ever heard of the Sybilline Oracles?
quote: The traditional dates aren't objective either - probably less objective, since the dates you don't like are actually based on evidence. Remember YOU are the one claiming genuine prophecy, so YOU have to support your dates. If the date is in question and all you have is tradition then that's your problem. Of course, I should also point out that there are plenty of alleged prophecies where the dating isn't the issue, and even quite a number of alleged prophecies which don't even claim to be prophecies.
quote: Yes Faith, we know that you hate people who dare to disagree with your idols. It' some of the ways that you prove that you're only a Christian in name.
quote: Yes, imaginary "work" that you can't produce is enough for you. But unfortunately the burden of proof is on you. If you can't make a good case that's your problem. I'm under no obligation to take your views as the default and your record of error and prejudice is more than enough reason to distrust your opinions anyway.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I'm asking for even a CLAIMED miracle that really is a miracle -- which is the suspension of natural law, such as water to wine, thousands of fishes and loaves of bread out of a few, instant healing of paralysis, lameness or blindness, bringing the dead back to life, etc. -- outside the Bible. As I said, I don't know of any.
I'm sort of surprised about that. I can remember stories of Hindu statues drinking milk, Chrisitans claiming that gold fillings had miraculously appeared in their teeth, Catholics claiming miracles for their saints. Really, you've heard none of these ? All those things are the kind of phenomena I mentioned as being mistaken for miracles. These are probably all demonic tricks. Gold fillings appearing in teeth is a Hindu style trick. Hindu Guru Sai Baba was famous for producing metal trinkets out of thin air. (He was also caught faking it at least once.) If it isn't faked it is probably demonic. It's not a miracle in any case. It's similar to the "gold dust" that sometimes falls on people under some circumstances in both Hindu and "Christian" revival type meetings. There is one guy who is known for the glittery stuff that falls when he is "ministering" at one of these events. He is mentioned in passing on a video at You Tube by Andrew Strom about Kundalini Yoga being mistaken for something from God in these supposedly Christian revivals. Sorry I don't remember his name, just another poor deluded soul I figure. Perhaps I will have to redefine miracle to say better what I mean. These are just petty little "manifestations" that are probably all demonic. Some said the statues drinking milk was because of capillary action in the stone. Perhaps that's the explanation in that case. But such phenomena by comparison with the miracles in the Bible are just petty little tricks, signifying nothing. Just Wow stuff to no good purpose. Unworthy of God for sure, who feeds hungry people, heals sick people, brings the dead back to life. I've "heard of" the Sibylline Oracles. What are you claiming about them? That they make accurate prophecies or what? The same is claimed for Nostradamus. Cryptic stuff that is so ambiguous people pretty much read whatever prophecies into it that appeal to them. There's also a Medieval "prophet" called Malachi who predicted that this current Pope is to be the last. He's said to have a good record in describing all the other Popes, but his stuff is also ambiguous. Such things are not prophecy in the Biblical sense at all, where most of the prophetic passages describe the Messiah who is to come. But Daniel prophesied also of empires that would arise and described them quite remarkably clearly, from the Babylonian through Medo-Persia, then Alexander the Great's Hellenic empire, the fourth to be the Roman Empire during which time the Messiah was to come. Which He did. Now THAT is prophecy. But if you date it after those events, as --alas-- our modern "scholars" are wont to do, you destroy it as prophecy. You also destroy the coherence of the text, though, which ought to be a clue that it only works as prophecy.
The traditional dates aren't objective either - probably less objective, since the dates you don't like are actually based on evidence. As I already said, they are not based on evidence, they are based on the ridiculous subjective judgements of unbelieving scholars. Whereas the traditional dates go back to antiquity, and one thing the ancient Jews did very well was preserve facts about their scriptures, as well as obsessively preserving the text itself.
Remember YOU are the one claiming genuine prophecy, so YOU have to support your dates. If the date is in question and all you have is tradition then that's your problem. I've made a very good case, though I know it's lost on you because you refuse to believe in such things.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
A demonic trick would still be a miracle.
These are probably all demonic tricks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
A demonic trick would still be a miracle. No, you don't get it. A miracle is defined as the God of the Bible suspending the laws of nature. Anything else does not count as a miracle. Therefore, the only miracles are those recorded in the Bible as being from God. See? Its perfectly circular, you cannot deny it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
A demonic trick would still be a miracle. Not the way I'm using the word, and I think it's important to make the distinction. God produces miracles, but these other things aren't from God. HOWEVER, they can be dramatic phenomena for those who deny all such things. I happened to find the very spot on the You Tube video I mentioned to PaulK, where the guy who is known for the glittery dust that falls on people is mentioned. Right before him a woman who has the stigmata on her hands is shown. Go to 25.00 on the slider. The whole video is a presentation of the phenomena known as Kundalini manifestations that occurs in Hindu settings but has been showing up in Christian revivals, intended to warn Christians that these things are not from God. Was just going to link it, think I'll embed it:
No YouTube URL Provided ABE: Sorry, got the counter number wrong. 25.00 should be right. (Sorry, my eyes are getting bad) Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Catholic Scientist writes:
And a Scotsman is defined as somebody who eats his porridge in a certain way - nothing whatever to do with Scotland.
A miracle is defined as the God of the Bible suspending the laws of nature.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
I know. You're using the word incorrectly. A miracle is a suspension of the laws of nature. You can distinguish between "Godly miracles" and "ungodly miracles" if you like but you can't just make up your own definitions. ringo writes:
Not the way I'm using the word, and I think it's important to make the distinction. God produces miracles, but these other things aren't from God. A demonic trick would still be a miracle. Edited by ringo, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Firstly I am glad that you bothered to try to write off the claims as fakes or demonic tricks, because I'm always (almost always) happy to be proved right. It's completely irrelevant, of course, since we're only talking about claims of miracles.
I don't think that my examples are any worse than the floating axe head you've used as an example in earlier posts, and all the claims are of things contrary to natural law, as required. If Christian (in the broad sense) miracles count, how about the resurrection of Daniel Ekechukwu, supposedly dead for two days?
quote: That they're claimed to be prophecies, when you said that no Non-Biblical religion made such a claim.
quote: Ironically you have to rely on a lack of clarity in Daniel to claim that the book refers to the Roman Empire at all (although there is a brief reference to the Roman Republic). In fact there's pretty strong internal evidence that the 4th Empire is the Diadochi Kingdoms (possibly including Alexander's Empire, possibly counting it as separate - it isn't clear!)
quote: Repeating a false assertion does not make it any less false.
quote: Now that is an outright lie.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
What I've been trying to say is that the Bible is the only religious revelation in which miracles and prophecies are intrinsic to its revelation and theology rather than merely sources of amazement or amusement or personal experience. They are given to prove the nature of God, and I think if you give it some thought yourself you'd have to agree that those claimed in the Bible are on a much higher plane of quality than those I've called demonic manifestations. They have real significance for one thing, they aren't there just to entertain and wow or move your emotions.
Most of the prophecies point to and define the coming Messiah, but also world events including the rise and fall of empires, culminating in a grand finale on a worldwide scale in the Book of Revelation. Oracles on the other hand are pretty limited in their scope not to mention often ambiguous and hard to decipher. Also the messages of oracles are usually a motley collection that can apply to all kinds of situations as they are consulted, but they are not intrinsic to any particular religious belief nor designed to serve its theology. The Sibilline oracles, for instance, are described at Wikipedia as indeterminate as to religious system. This is in contrast with the prophecies of the Bible which cumulatively build up the revelation of God's nature, the plan of redemption through the Messiah, and the future of the entire Creation. The miracles are of a kind that only the true Creator God could do. Manifesting gold dust or bloody tears on a statue is a bit paltry by comparison with making the sun stand still or move backwards, parting the Red Sea, filling empty vessels to the brim with oil, turning large pots of water into (really really good) wine, turning a few fish and loaves of bread into enough to feed thousands, healing usually incurable infirmities, and raising the dead. I just can't see statues drinking milk as comparable. And I doubt you can either. So. I understand why you all want to call all of these things miracles, but it does rather confuse the issue to insist on that term. And I'm not at all sure that manifesting gold dust suspends any natural laws either, or statues weeping tears, bloody or not, and the like. Unusual stuff, yes, but exactly what law is being violated? Moving the sun around on the other hand certainly violates the law of the natural movement of the sun, and raising the dead violates the law that once you're dead you're dead, and so on. True, statues don't normally weep blood or drink milk. How about "lesser" and "greater" miracles or something like that? I agree that the floating ax head is a more trivial event, but on the other hand I'm not sure the demons could produce that one either. And it also had a purpose, to return the ax head to the man who had dropped it in the water, which was a great loss to him. Again, not just a magic trick to wow us, but a demonstration of God's provision and power. 2 Kings 6. Daniel is a huge study but every commentator I'm aware of agrees that the Roman Empire is the fourth kingdom prophesied in the vision of the great and terrible beast, the legs and ten toes of the statue and so on. You DON'T refuse to believe in such things? I simply thought you did. You don't seem at all inclined toward belief but only toward finding reasons against it. I wasn't lying, and now I'm surprised to hear that I'm wrong about this. But I suppose you mean you simply aren't convinced, rather than that you refuse, right? Well, from my point of view the evidence is sufficient which suggests that not finding it sufficient involves refusal. Insult I suppose, lie, no. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: A floating axe head is of higher quality than a resurrection? I don't think so. And to be honest, I chose the miraculous dental fillings as an example because they were ridiculous, and yet spontaneously-appearing gold fillings violate natural law, which was the criterion you set. I nearly used medium Daniel Dunglas Hume floating out of a third story window, and in another one.
quote: Not even you can claim that the Revelation is clear!
quote: And most of those come from legendary material. I could come up with impressive examples if I used legends. I thought about it and chose not to.
quote: Humans could manage it with a trick axe head, for instance.
quote: If you choose to trust commentators over the Bible that's your problem. Read Daniel 8 carefully. And, since you claim that Daniel is clear, can you really find an absolutely clear reference to the Roman Empire there? I assure you, except for the one reference to the Republic, there isn't one.
quote: Oh, I don't believe things I know to be false, nor do I uncritically believe the unsupported opinions of someone who is very often wrong. But I don't consider either to make a good case. And I don't think that any rational person would disagree with me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 348 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined: |
I have so many points of disagreement. I think that it mostly boils down to what others have said in that your reasoning is circular.
Can God not be found without the bible?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
ProtoTypical writes: Even the Bible itself says that He can.(Romans 18) and of course at the time of the Gospels there was no actual Bible...but there was OT Scrolls and writings. Can God not be found without the bible? The problem with finding God without the Bible is that God (the one that is found) is but a product of human imagination. I would argue that if God exists---apart from human legends and imaginings--it would be more likely that He found us long before we found Him. I know that I personally never found Him from simply reading the Bible. Critics would even question my sanity as to whether or not I met Him.(due to the fact that He found me.) In all honesty, I cant argue the point any further than what we have done.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I have so many points of disagreement. I think that it mostly boils down to what others have said in that your reasoning is circular. Can God not be found without the bible? All people have some sense of the Creator God, though a vague and distorted view of Him because our minds are corrupted by the Fall. The Bible was given to us so we can really know Him. And there is no other source of that knowledge, and certainly not of our need of salvation from sin and His provision of that salvation. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The problem with finding God without the Bible is that God (the one that is found) is but a product of human imagination. Very true.
I know that I personally never found Him from simply reading the Bible. Critics would even question my sanity as to whether or not I met Him.(due to the fact that He found me.) Quite right, as the Bible tells us. God chooses US, we don't choose Him.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
But God finding us is irrelevant. God choosing us is irrelevant. The question is, "How do we know we've been found?"
I would argue that if God exists---apart from human legends and imaginings--it would be more likely that He found us long before we found Him.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024