Religion or Science - How do they compare?

You have concluded it is fiction. I disagree. My point though is that even if it is fiction they believed it to to historically accurate. Of course it is relevamt. If they are knowlingly writing fiction then we have no conclusion to draw. From the texts it is clear that they believed what they were writing so we can accept them as wrong or accurate to whatever degree we like.

Absolutely. The thing is though that the messiah was not expected to be in any way divine. A messiah was expected to be a human figure that would lead them against their enemies, defeat them and rebuild the temple. Also, if they were going to make up a resurrection story they wouldn't have had Him barbecuing fish or doing the other human like things that He did.There is also no clear motivation of why they would do this. They never really understood His message until after the resurrection. Even after that, in the 1st chapter of Acts they are still asking about when He is going to restore Israel as a regional power.They had already assumed He was a failed messaih after the crucifixion. Why would they want to start it up again? It put them at odds with most of their friends and family. Do you really think they would do this for a lie? If I get a chance I'll answer this in the current thread on the subject.

There is for me.

If I were to pray to have water turned into wine and it happened, (hasn't worked so far), it wouldn't be me performing the niracle but God working through me. Firstly there is no reasonable motive for them to do that, but also they would have gone with something more Jewish like in the story of the transfiguration. Why on earth would they do that. If Jesus simply died with nothing further happening it would simply be the end of the story. They would have as the Jews did in other cases, gone on to another messiah who would hopefully get the job done in the manner that they had understood. Jesus did fulfill the establishment of the Kingdom but it was a world wide kingdom instead of a specified piece of real estate. He also rebuilt the Temple but it was in the hearts of those who His followers instead of a physical building. Not what they were expecting or looking for. As an atheist that is obviously correct. As a theist I see the latter as being most likely. It pretty much depends on our starting point.

Even the charlatans that cook up fake healings say that it is God using them as a vessel or something similar.

Hi Phat I didn't really want to jump back into this thread but I did want to say something about this.Firstly it isn't about which deity we believe in. For example all Abrahamic religions at their root worship the same god. I would go further than that and say that all theistic religions worship the same god.Where we differ is in our understanding of the deity. What is the nature of that deity and what should it mean to my life and for the whole world for that matter. Obviously there are also differences within the same religion. Faith is prepared to worship a deity who would be prepared to support genocide and public stoning. I worship a deity who would under no circumstances do such a thing. These differences obviously come from differing understandings of how the Bible should be understood.Also, I have a problem with talking about the deity that we believe in. It really should be about the god that we have trust in and a want to follow in this life. I’ve used this quote before but the following is from CS Lewis’ The Last Battle.

quote:

---

There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.

​

So I went over much grass and many flowers and among all kinds of wholesome and delectable tree till lo! In a narrow place between two rocks there came to meet me a great Lion. The speed of him was like an ostrich, and his size was an elephant’s; his hair was like pure gold that is liquid in the furnace. He was more terrible than the Flaming Mountain of Langour, and in beauty he surpassed all that is in the world even as the rose in bloom surpasses the dust of the desert.

​

Then I fell at his feet and thought, Surely this is the hour of death, for the Lion (who is worthy of all honour) will know that I have served Tash all my days and not him. Nevertheless, it is better to see the Lion and die than to be Tisroc of the world and live and not to have seen him.

​

But the Glorious One bent down his golden head and touched my forehead with his tongue and said, Son thou art welcome. But I said, Alas, Lord, I am no son of thine but the servant of Tash. He answered, Child, all the service thou hast done to Tash, I account as service done to me.

​

Then by reason of my great desire for wisdom and understanding, I overcame my fear and questioned the Glorious One and said, Lord, is it then true, as the Ape said, that thou and Tash are one? The Lion growled so that the earth shook (but his wrath was not against me) and said, It is false. Not because he and I are one, but because we are opposites, I take to me the services which thou hast done to him. For I and he are of such different kinds that no service which is vile can be done to me, and none which is not vile can be done to him. Therefore if any man swear by Tash and keep his oath for the oath’s sake, it is by me that he has truly sworn, though he know it not, and it is I who reward him. And if any man do a cruelty in my name, then, though he says he says the name Aslan, it is Tash whom he serves and by Tash his deed is accepted.

​

Dost thou understand , Child? I said, Lord, thou knowest how much I understand. But I said also (for the truth constrained me), Yet I have been seeking Tash all my days. Beloved, said the Glorious One, unless thy desire had been for me thou wouldst not have sought so long and so truly. For all find what they truly seek.

---

Obviously Tash represents a deity who espouses hatred and Aslan represents a deity who espouses love. However Lewis’ point is that acts of love done in the name of Tash are actually done for Aslan and acts of hatred done in the name of Aslan are actually done for Tash.Belief is too often understood to mean that we give intellectual ascent to some doctrine. Belief should be more like a wedding vow when we say I do when we pledge faithfulness and loving service.I would also add that too often our religious adherence is based on what we can get out of it for ourselves, whether it be in this life or the next, when it should be about how we can serve our deity. I contend that the we as Christians are told that we can serve our God by loving our neighbour and by providing good stewardship to our planet and the creatures on it. That is my belief about the nature of God. That understanding of the deity can also be held by people of any specific religion.Edited by GDR, : to change title

I wouldn't include Tangle in that, although I agree with Bob Dylan when he wrote, "you got to serve somebody". An atheist obviously doesn't worship any deity as they deny the existence of one.Presumably though, any theist must have put some thought in to what they believe about the nature of what ever god they believe in, and what if anything that should mean to their life. It doesn't matter what name is attached to a deity, it is the nature of the deity that is important.As I pointed out in my last post even though Faith and I are both Christians we disagree about the nature of God as we follow Him. In both cases our beliefs might more closely be related to the nature of what a Muslim might believe about the nature of Allah.Certainly as Christians we do believe certain things such as the divinity of Christ, and so we can use Jesus as the perfect example of God's nature, but that does not mean that we can't come to the same understanding of the nature of God in other ways.My signature tells us what the OT tells us about what God hopes for us, and obviously it is really pretty simple.AbE It isn't the name that we attach to a deity, it is the nature of the deity and how it impacts our life that matters ultimately.Edited by GDR, : typoEdited by GDR, : No reason given.