Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are religions manmade and natural or supernaturally based?
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 9 of 511 (771352)
10-24-2015 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by PaulK
10-24-2015 4:30 AM


PaulK writes:
And I laughed, almost out loud when I saw the claim that there was excellent evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. Odd that I've never seen any, despite investigation. I'd say that the evidence, properly considered is against it. Care to produce your evidence?
There isn't conclusive evidence so ultimately it is a matter of belief.
However, the Gospels exist. We know approximately when they were written and as Luke says in his opening that they were compilations drawn from other earlier sources.
It is very clear from the accounts written by Paul and other NT authors that they believed strongly that the resurrection was an actual historical event. The question is — did they get it right or wrong.
The Gospel accounts have a strong ring of truth in that they show the first Jesus followers in a negative light, they have women, (women were considered to be unreliable witnesses in that culture), as the first to experience the risen Christ, the accounts differ in small ways which makes collusion seem very unlikely, there is no written contradiction to the accounts and Paul who had been a strong adversary became convinced of the resurrection giving up a life of prestige and position for a life of living on handouts, a life always at risk and a life of discomfort in general.
There was no one who at the time was able to produce a body which would have put a quick end to the whole idea of resurrection.
There were many people at the time the Gospels were written who would have been able to dispel the Gospel accounts as well as the Epistles as written by Paul
There were numerous other messianic movements during that period and inevitably the leaders, and usually their followers, were put to death. In every other case when the would be messiahs were put to death their movement simply died out. Their followers simply went looking for another messiah. Many of these messianic leaders had actually been able to lead their followers into battle against the Romans with some success whereas Jesus simply led a small group of rag-tag followers preaching a message of peace that ticked off just about everybody. Without the resurrection Jesus would have been about the least likely to inspire an on-going movement.
The Gospels accounts tell of Jesus' followers doing what essentially amounted to a disappearing act at the time of the crucifixion. They didn't want to suffer the same fate as Jesus. They would have seen what had happened to others in their situation although in this case the risk would have been less as they hadn't mounted up a military threat to the Romans.
However something happened that changed all of that, They say that what had changed for them was that the Jesus that had been crucified had been resurrected as we see in the Gospel accounts.
That is evidence! Is it conclusive? No. Can it be repeated? No, but that is true of any historical account.
In the end, we all make up our mind as to whether we believe the accounts are essentially accurate or not, (but not necessarily inerrant in the details), and then decide how that impacts our life if at all.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by PaulK, posted 10-24-2015 4:30 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 12:09 AM GDR has replied
 Message 14 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 2:58 AM GDR has replied
 Message 57 by Greatest I am, posted 10-27-2015 9:55 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 11 of 511 (771357)
10-25-2015 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Faith
10-25-2015 12:09 AM


Re: More evidence for the resurrection
I agree Faith. Actually, I had mentioned that in my post.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 12:09 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 12:59 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 18 of 511 (771370)
10-25-2015 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by PaulK
10-25-2015 2:58 AM


PaulK writes:
As you know we've been over this and the case against the resurrection is stronger. Despite your dishonest attempts to attack the evidence.
Your claim was that there was no evidence. I produced evidence which which as we know you discount, but it is evidence. Now, just what did I say that was dishonest. You are calling me a liar and I'd like to know where it was that I lied.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 2:58 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 11:38 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 27 of 511 (771414)
10-25-2015 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by PaulK
10-25-2015 11:38 AM


PaulK writes:
In fact I said that I wasn't aware of any "excellent evidence". And you certainly didn't manage to produce any of that.
Whether it is excellent or not is my opinion against yours and we aren't going to agree.
PaulK writes:
As for your dishonesty, I give one example from the previous discussion. According to the Gospel of Luke Jesus ordered to the disciples to stay in Jerusalem. Because the gospel also says that they took a short trip outside the walls, to the Mount of Olives - a trip too short to count against Sabbath provisions against travelling, you insisted that the restriction would also allow a trip to Galilee!
Can you give me a link to that? I sure can't remember that discussion and frankly it isn't an argument I would make.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 11:38 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 1:49 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 31 of 511 (771428)
10-26-2015 2:16 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by PaulK
10-26-2015 1:49 AM


PaulK writes:
Really? Do you really accept that a command to stay in Jerusalem would allow a short trip outside the walks, but rule out a trip to Galilee ?
I asked for a link as I am quite sure I have never made that argument with you or anyone else on the forum. I thought my previous post was pretty clear. I think that you have me mixed up with someone else, so again, I would like to know why you claimed that I was being dishonest.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 1:49 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 8:43 AM GDR has replied
 Message 59 by Greatest I am, posted 10-27-2015 10:15 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 42 of 511 (771513)
10-26-2015 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by PaulK
10-26-2015 8:43 AM


PaulK writes:
Interesting that you don't answer the question.
But here you are insisting that if the disciples could get away with a trip to the Mount of Olives, they could get away with going all the way to Galilee.
That wasn't the point I was making at all. I agree that there are discrepancies in the accounts. I don't agree that these discrepancies negate the main point which is that God did something unique in Jesus by resurrecting Him.
For that matter I contend that the fact that there are differences just goes to show that there wasn't collusion and that there wasn't an organized group starting something with ulterior motives. INHO, which obviously is opposite to your opinion, is that the differences actually give credibility to the essential message of the NT.
The entire NT is written around that event with the writers trying to get their head around what God was doing, what He would do in the future and what it should mean to their lives. People are still doing that today. (Including me. )
They aren't all in agreement about the answers or even historical details but they all are in agreement that Jesus was resurrected.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 8:43 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 5:56 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 44 of 511 (771517)
10-26-2015 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by PaulK
10-26-2015 5:56 PM


PaulK writes:
You definitely suggest a trip to Galilee, based on the short day-trip to the Mount of Olives, which is only against the strictest interpretation of Jesus' (supposed) command.
Frankly I wrongly interpreted what was meant by a short-day trip which is ignorance, not dishonesty, a term you like to liberally throw around.
PaulK writes:
And really, can you imagine Matthew completely ignoring the encounter on the road to Emmaus, and wrongly placing the appearances in Galilee as would have to be the cause if Luke/Acts is correct. And if Luke/Acts is wrong, then the Encounter on the road to Emmaus must be a fiction and quite likely more, besides.
In Matthew Jesus says to tell the brethren to leave for Galilee. This does not preclude Jesus turning up anywhere else. We don't know that all the brethren got the memo. Also, Matthew does say that the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee and it would make sense that it would be the eleven disciples who Jesus was referring to when He told them to pass on the message to go to Galilee. It wasn't two of the eleven that Jesus appeared to on the road to Emmaus.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 5:56 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by PaulK, posted 10-27-2015 2:05 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 294 of 511 (772286)
11-11-2015 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by Tangle
11-11-2015 1:53 PM


Re: ICANT,
Tangle writes:
All you've done is invoke the uncaused cause. Goddit. Turtles all the way down. Fine, end of discussion. It's just special pleading, "your argument requires a cause, mine doesn't"
Actually it is more so the other way around. Your position requires an infinite stream of endless processes. Evolution is a process that required a process to allow it to begin, which required a process which required....., or in other words it's turtles all the way down.
Various scientific theories involve multiple dimensions of time. Multiple dimensions of time could conceivably mean that one could move around in time infinitely just as we move around infinitely in our 3 spatial dimensions. This could allow for an infinite god thus negating the need for cause.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by Tangle, posted 11-11-2015 1:53 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by Tangle, posted 11-11-2015 4:24 PM GDR has replied
 Message 296 by 1.61803, posted 11-11-2015 4:31 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 297 of 511 (772289)
11-11-2015 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by Tangle
11-11-2015 4:24 PM


Re: ICANT,
Tangle writes:
Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with this. Evolution is a mostly understood process that began billions of years after what we regard as the beginning of what we know as the universe. Even you understand and accept that, so why conflate the issues?
I'm not. You used the "turtles all the way down" argument and I am simply pointing out that it actually argues more against the simply materialistic view of origins than it does the theistic view. Evolution, no matter how well understood would have to be be just one process at the end of essentially an infinite stream of processes.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Tangle, posted 11-11-2015 4:24 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by Tangle, posted 11-11-2015 5:28 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 298 of 511 (772290)
11-11-2015 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by 1.61803
11-11-2015 4:31 PM


Re: ICANT,
1.61803 writes:
Hi GDR, I always thought that abiogenesis and evolution were not mutually exclusive. Also the origin of the cosmos has nothing to do with either. Invoking the supernatural is for all intents and purposes is intellectual equivalent of saying "it is what it is".
Abiogenesis is necessary for evolution to begin, and there had to be some other process that allowed for abiogenesis, with processes going back to the origin of the cosmos.
We make up our own minds about whether the processes that have led up to sentient beings with an understanding of morality are based on an infinite string of mindless processes or is there an intelligent moral first cause.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by 1.61803, posted 11-11-2015 4:31 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 306 by 1.61803, posted 11-12-2015 10:17 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 300 of 511 (772293)
11-11-2015 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 299 by Tangle
11-11-2015 5:28 PM


Re: ICANT,
Tangle writes:
'Turtles all the way down' is a metaphor for an infinite regression. God made the universe. Who made god? God made god. Who made god? Etc etc etc. It's got nothing to do with evolution.
I get that. But the point of the expression is, as you say, about infinite regression. I am using the argument of infinite regression and applying it to a strictly material, universe of mindless origins. It would require an infinite regression of mindless processes to arrive in a world teeming with life, and ultimately sentient life with a sense of morality.
If we are making a case for this world being the result of a moral sentient intelligence then we can get around the argument of infinite regression by theorizing, as science does for other reasons, to postulate the idea of multiple dimensions of time where life can be infinite. Certainly, the idea of multiple dimensions of time is highly theoretical but if science can do it why can't theologians. This of course would give us an understanding of a God who always was and always will be, which negates the need for all those turtles.
Tangle writes:
Science just says we don't know. Don't confuse thing that we know with things that we don't.
Of course, neither one of us know. We have formed our own beliefs based on what we do know, or think we know.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by Tangle, posted 11-11-2015 5:28 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 302 by Tangle, posted 11-12-2015 3:25 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 311 by Omnivorous, posted 11-12-2015 6:52 PM GDR has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024