Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did any author in the New Testament actually know Jesus?
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 61 of 306 (493664)
01-10-2009 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by 8upwidit2
01-10-2009 5:41 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
One's devotion to "faith" that something supernatural is true with absolutely no proof it ever happened would be considered lunacy
I think trust is earned. Your mother and father probably told you at a young age that they were your parents. Now you really don't know that to be true. You didn't witness them conceiving you or giving you birth.
But perhaps you percieved their love and care for you so that you eventually came to trust them.
As a teen did you ask them to produce the birth certificate ? Did you verify that the doctors that signed it had not commiting fraud or a mistake? Did you go back to the hospital to verify that the document was really genuine?
I wonder if you have asked them to have a DNA analysis done to prove that you are their offspring. If you have not done this, why not? You really don't know then that they are definitely your parents.
I think you probably have chosen to trust them based on the treatment you have received from them. But I think you have to admit that this is a kind of "faith".
You really don't know who your parents are with total certainty. You have to trust someone.
almost anywhere thought processes occur unless it is religious faith. Herein lies the problem with non-cultists attitudes.
Therefore there is resentment, skepticism and distrust. The participants in this faith cult are not only "blind devotees" they also arrogantly flaunt their baseless belief in the face of reason...and evidence to the contrary.
Well, before I encountered Jesus Christ for myself, I met several people who talk about Jesus as if they knew Him. Not all of them seemed "arrogant" to me or flaunting anything in the face of reason. I coulldn't say that these were characteristics of every Christian I met.
I did look intently into their eyes as thet spoke of Jesus. I did that to ascertain if they REALLY believed these things that they were telling me.
After I accepted Christ into my spirit for myself, I asked God to lead me to Christians who would help my faith. God was faithful to lead me to people who helped me grow in faith.
I did not make the error of searching for those who would hurt my faith. And I never looked for those who gave me reasons to disbelieve.
Like learning to trust a loving parent, as I read through the Bible I learned that my better interest was always on the mind of God. I suppose that I learned to trust because of the manifestation of His love for me.
By the way, that doesn't mean that I liked everything I read any more that I always liked everything my parents wanted me to do. But the perceived motive of love taught me trust God, the Bible, and Jesus.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by 8upwidit2, posted 01-10-2009 5:41 AM 8upwidit2 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-10-2009 7:26 AM jaywill has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3100 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 62 of 306 (493668)
01-10-2009 7:26 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by jaywill
01-10-2009 7:13 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Very well put Jaywill. That is one of the more logically sound and coherently consistent statements from a Christian I have read on this board.
This still does not negate the burden of proof required for your belief system but I do admire the lack of self-righteous and condescending nature in this post.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 7:13 AM jaywill has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3100 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 63 of 306 (493670)
01-10-2009 7:29 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by jaywill
01-10-2009 6:55 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Thanks for your reply.
Then according to your own advice we should also approach what you write here about Jesus Christ and the New Testament documents with skepticism.
That's at least equally fair.
Of course. All logical debate should be open to critique, pro or con. However the burden of proof lies with the one trying to prove the existence of something, in this case God, Jesus and the entire Bible story, not the other way around.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 6:55 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 7:57 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2294 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 64 of 306 (493671)
01-10-2009 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by jaywill
01-10-2009 6:55 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Then according to your own advice we should also approach what you write here about Jesus Christ and the New Testament documents with skepticism.
That's at least equally fair.
Of course you should. You are welcome to find and show me evidence that what I claim is not true. I claim that there is no evidence for anything Jesus is alleged to have said or done according to the bible. When you are sceptic of this, do some research, and when you find ANY evidence, please provide, and I will alter or even retract my statement, depending on what the evidence is of course.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 6:55 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 7:45 AM Huntard has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 65 of 306 (493672)
01-10-2009 7:40 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by jaywill
01-09-2009 8:45 PM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Ok, let's say for a moment this is true, and there did actually live a guy named Jesus at that time, and he was the inspiration for the bible story. Now answer me this question: What is the evidence that anything Jesus did according to the bible did actually happen?
One of the things which convinces me that Jesus' words and deeds did occur is that He changed my life.
For example I read of these words:
"Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying,
If anyone thirst, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes into Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his innermost being shall flow rivers of living water."
Then the Gospel writer John adds his comment:
"But this He said concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed into Him were about to receive; for the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified." (See John 7:37-39)
Now when I read about this matter of rivers of living water flowing out of the innermost being and this being the Spirit given by Jesus, I can honestly say that confirms something I experienced.
The night I called on the name of Jesus as if to contact a living Person, I felt like a flushed toilet. I felt exactly as if something negative was being flushed out of me and something sweet and thirst quenching was flowing into me.
I could only discribe like my heart and soul were being flushed by some heavenly Drano and flooded with sweet drinkable water. There had been such a dry thirst deep within me for something for years.
When I come to John 7:37-39 I can say that that passage sounds familiar to me experience. I know what that is talking about. From the time I called "Jesus, Jesus, I am tired. Jesus take me home" rivers of the Spirit of a living Person began to flow deep within my innermost being.
And many other passages have come to be very familiar sounding to me to the point that I am convinced that I am on the right track to call Jesus the Lord and Savior.
The changed lives of the gospel writers remind me of my own transformation from an unbeliever to a lover of Christ. I mean the disciples were hiding in the house for fear of persecution from the religiionists. They went from cowaring and timid hideouts to those willing to die for the testimony which they bore to the world.
Something changed them. And something changed me when I called on the name of Jesus. And I have witnessed the change in life within others whom I have introduced to Jesus.
So many of us believe that we are on the right track and that nothing sneaking or underhanded is going on in the account of the Son of God in the New Testament.
I anticipate your response to perhaps be that devotees of UFOs or other phenomenon also could say that their lives were changed.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by jaywill, posted 01-09-2009 8:45 PM jaywill has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-10-2009 10:05 AM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 66 of 306 (493673)
01-10-2009 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by Huntard
01-10-2009 7:36 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Of course you should. You are welcome to find and show me evidence that what I claim is not true. I claim that there is no evidence for anything Jesus is alleged to have said or done according to the bible. When you are sceptic of this, do some research, and when you find ANY evidence, please provide, and I will alter or even retract my statement, depending on what the evidence is of course.
I will show you evidence which I think argues that the Gospel writers were more likely NOT spreading false propoganda. I will present evidence which argues that probably they WERE telling the truth.
We are not without our reasons to suspect that more likely Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were faithful witnesses to what they wrote about. (Luke a companion of Paul was not one of the twelve disciples. And Mark, traditionally thought to be an assistant to Peter also was not one of the twelve disciples).
I'll have to attend to this latter today.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Huntard, posted 01-10-2009 7:36 AM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by 8upwidit2, posted 01-10-2009 8:01 AM jaywill has replied
 Message 69 by Huntard, posted 01-10-2009 8:10 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 72 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-10-2009 10:21 AM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 67 of 306 (493677)
01-10-2009 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by DevilsAdvocate
01-10-2009 7:29 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Of course. All logical debate should be open to critique, pro or con. However the burden of proof lies with the one trying to prove the existence of something, in this case God, Jesus and the entire Bible story, not the other way around.
I will present some reasons why I think the Gospel writers were not creating false propoganda.
I do not necessarily agree on who the "burden of proof" should be on in this matter.
This goes back to the question of why should mistrust be the initial attitude upon coming to the Bible?
I don't accept necessarily that Disbelief is the Default proper attitude and that the "burden of proof" is on the believer. The skeptic will see to it that the goal post is moved so many times indefinitely that it will be impossible to satisfy this so-called "burden of proof".
Evidence for my belief, I will present though, gladly.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-10-2009 7:29 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

8upwidit2
Member (Idle past 4445 days)
Posts: 88
From: Katrinaville USA
Joined: 02-03-2005


Message 68 of 306 (493678)
01-10-2009 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by jaywill
01-10-2009 7:45 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Jaywill, I, too, would and have fought so that you can believe the way you do. But you (and others of your faith) try to use the excuses that "you can't see the wind, yet it's there" or in your case, "Are your parents really your parents". If they were not my real parents, at least they are somebody that I can touch and that verifies they do exist. Jesus, God, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny are not such entities.
I repeat myself and others, out of ALL the discoveries on Planet Earth in the last 5,000 years (geology, archeology, science of any kind) NOT ONE suggests the supernatural versions in the Bible or Jesus of Legend, Jehovah, or God is true. NOT ONE. How do you deal with these facts verses faith or fiction?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 7:45 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 8:37 AM 8upwidit2 has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2294 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 69 of 306 (493680)
01-10-2009 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by jaywill
01-10-2009 7:45 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Jaywill writes:
I will show you evidence which I think argues that the Gospel writers were more likely NOT spreading false propoganda. I will present evidence which argues that probably they WERE telling the truth.
Good. I await it with great anticipation.
We are not without our reasons to suspect that more likely Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were faithful witnesses to what they wrote about. (Luke a companion of Paul was not one of the twelve disciples. And Mark, traditionally thought to be an assistant to Peter also was not one of the twelve disciples).
You've hit the first problem right there. The gospels were almost certainly NOT written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
I'll have to attend to this latter today.
Sure, take your time, I reckon it isn't that easy to find evidence for this. I haven't found any, anyways.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 7:45 AM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 70 of 306 (493685)
01-10-2009 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by 8upwidit2
01-10-2009 8:01 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
Jaywill, I, too, would and have fought so that you can believe the way you do. But you (and others of your faith) try to use the excuses that "you can't see the wind, yet it's there" or in your case, "Are your parents really your parents". If they were not my real parents, at least they are somebody that I can touch and that verifies they do exist. Jesus, God, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny are not such entities.
When you talk about touching someone, I have to say that perhaps in the case of Jesus your are not using the right organ to do the touching.
There is something within you which as an organ can "touch" and substantiate God. You should consider that you have not yet discovered what is the organ with which you can touch God.
You cannot use your eyes to see sound. Nor can you use your ears to hear light. (I speak typically. No need to speak of special exceptions). You use the proper organ to substantiate the matter which needs to be verified.
There is an "organ" within you that is deeper than your physical hands, and eyes, and nose, and even your mind which can taste and touch God. You can excercise that organ and learn to use it through real genuine prayer.
Some people "stumble" upon this organ and have some experience with God. They do not know how it happened. They cannot duplicate it without guidance.
Then some learn by practice to use their spirit, their innermost praying organ to touch and taste God.
You being is opened to three realms - the body towards the physical world, your soul towards the psychological world, and your spirit towards the spiritual world.
To deny the spiritual realm is like being a three dimensional being who only lives on two dimensions. There is a third dimension of the spiritual.
I have to go now. Talk latter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by 8upwidit2, posted 01-10-2009 8:01 AM 8upwidit2 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-10-2009 10:37 AM jaywill has replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3100 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 71 of 306 (493700)
01-10-2009 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by jaywill
01-10-2009 7:40 AM


Re: Subjective personal experience is not conclusive evidence for existence of God
One of the things which convinces me that Jesus' words and deeds did occur is that He changed my life
This is a subjective experience. People's live have changed due to many other factors (not just religious) as well. For example, many who have a windfall of money i.e. inheritance, lottery, etc; physical trauma; emotional trauma; a percieved perception of paranormal experience i.e. UFO's, ESP, ghosts, demons, etc, there lives have changed dramatically. How do we decipher whether your personal experiences are real? It may be real to you but not to me and vice versa. This is a logical fallacy of relying on ancedotal evidence. How we believe you to not be lying, embellishing or how do we know this is not all in your mind.
BTW, I used to be a Christian as well and had some very poignant and powerful emotional experiences as well. I remember as a young teenager attending a very moving Christian play which parallels the story of Jesus Christ about a toymaker (God) who made toys (humans) of which many turned against him. I don't remember the exact plot but by the end I was in tears. This was a powerful and moving emotional experience but can I honestly say that it was not all in my mind? I can tell you other stories such as my Grandfather baptizing me when I was 8 or the discipling Church I attended in my early 20 years in which people were very genuinely loving (but things turned ugly later on and hypocricy was rampant).
I too led a Bible study and baptized two of my friends of the ship I was stationed on. However, due to further analysis using the critical thinking skills my parents planted in my psyche and my thirst for truth and knowledge I began to investigate the church I was part of and found corruption all throughout its leadership.
I attended Churches for the next 10 years including Christian Churches, Independent Baptist, Southern Baptist, Episcopalean and Methodist. Within the last 5 years, as a result of my experiences and my study of religion, science and history in an objective light, I began to see how illogical and unsubstantiated religion in general is.
The psyche is very powerful thing which is why psychiatry and psychology are such flourishing professions. I am sure the followers of Jim Jones and many other influential religious figures also had deeply moving religious experiences that they themselves believed to be true. Why should yours or even mine be any different?
Imagine what shambles science would be in if we accepted every personal experience someone had as being conclusive evidence for something to be true. We would have to accept all sorts of pseudoscientific crap from colon cleansers to UFO abductions and Big Foot. Therefore, you will have to bring more to the table than subjective, biased, emotionally laden personal experiences.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 7:40 AM jaywill has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3100 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 72 of 306 (493703)
01-10-2009 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by jaywill
01-10-2009 7:45 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
I will show you evidence which I think argues that the Gospel writers were more likely NOT spreading false propoganda. I will present evidence which argues that probably they WERE telling the truth.
Don't get me wrong Jaywill. I am pretty certain you are not knowingly speading false propoganda and you seem to be very fervent in your faith (I do admire your honesty and lack of self-righetous attitude over many other religious fundamentalists on EvC). I was too when I was a Christian was certain I was spreading a message of Good News as proclaimed by Christ in his Great Commissioning. And you still might not be spreading false propoganda. However, how do people who have asked for objective (not subjective) evidence for the existence of God know unless you can prove it to them.
We are not without our reasons to suspect that more likely Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were faithful witnesses to what they wrote about. (Luke a companion of Paul was not one of the twelve disciples. And Mark, traditionally thought to be an assistant to Peter also was not one of the twelve disciples).
That is a large leep of faith to trust the writers of a 2000+ year old book especially when it has been subject to much historial revisionism from Canonical councils and the unscrupulous influence by the corrupt all-powerful Catholic Church during the first 1500 or so hundred years of the history of the Christian religion.
I'll have to attend to this latter today.
Will be waiting, though I am pretty sure I have heard most of this before. BTW, I do have both volumes of 'Evidence that Demands a Verdict' as well as many other Christian apologetic books in my library.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 7:45 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by jaywill, posted 01-11-2009 8:36 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3100 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 73 of 306 (493704)
01-10-2009 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by jaywill
01-10-2009 8:37 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
When you talk about touching someone, I have to say that perhaps in the case of Jesus your are not using the right organ to do the touching.
There is something within you which as an organ can "touch" and substantiate God. You should consider that you have not yet discovered what is the organ with which you can touch God.
You cannot use your eyes to see sound. Nor can you use your ears to hear light. (I speak typically. No need to speak of special exceptions). You use the proper organ to substantiate the matter which needs to be verified.
There is an "organ" within you that is deeper than your physical hands, and eyes, and nose, and even your mind which can taste and touch God. You can excercise that organ and learn to use it through real genuine prayer.
Some people "stumble" upon this organ and have some experience with God. They do not know how it happened. They cannot duplicate it without guidance.
Then some learn by practice to use their spirit, their innermost praying organ to touch and taste God.
You being is opened to three realms - the body towards the physical world, your soul towards the psychological world, and your spirit towards the spiritual world.
To deny the spiritual realm is like being a three dimensional being who only lives on two dimensions. There is a third dimension of the spiritual.
This is all subjective with no shred of evidence other than emotionally laden personal experiences as I discussed earlier. BTW, I know exactly what you are talking about. I have laid prostrate on the ground in tears to the almighty as well. Can you provide credible, substantiated evidence of the existence of such an "organ" or existence of the spiritual besides anecdotal numinous experiences. The German theologian Rudolph Otto defines this experience you are talking about as the numinous or mysterium tremendum et fascinans (litterally meaning the mystery that repels and attracts).
Even C.S. Lewis explains the subjectiveness of this numonous feeling well as shown below in his book, The Problem of Pain:
C.S. Lewis writes:
Suppose you were told that there was a tiger in the next room: you would know that you were in danger and would probably feel fear. But if you were told "There is a ghost in the next room," and believed it, you would feel, indeed, what is often called fear, but of a different kind. It would not be based on the knowledge of danger, for no one is primarily afraid of what a ghost may do to him, but of the mere fact that it is a ghost. It is "uncanny" rather than dangerous, and the special kind of fear it excites may be called Dread. With the Uncanny one has reached the fringes of the Numinous. Now suppose that you were told simply "There is a might spirit in the room" and believed it. Your feelings would then be even less like the mere fear of danger: but the disturbance would be profound. You would feel wonder and a certain shrinking-described as awe, and the object which excites it is the Numinous.
Again how do we know how much of this numinous experience is not a conjuration of our own psche to be able to deal with the unknown?

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by jaywill, posted 01-10-2009 8:37 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by jaywill, posted 01-11-2009 7:53 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied
 Message 75 by jaywill, posted 01-11-2009 8:17 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 74 of 306 (493853)
01-11-2009 7:53 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by DevilsAdvocate
01-10-2009 10:37 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
This is all subjective with no shred of evidence other than emotionally laden personal experiences as I discussed earlier.
It may be subjective. But that in and of itself does not mean that it must be false.
You do not have to believe it. But the "subjective" experience is confirmed by many passages in the Bible and by biographies of Christians for many centries. There is such a thing as someone knowing what they are talking about in the spiritual realm.
"He that is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17)
The Apostle teaches that the man who is joined to Jesus Christ has his innermost kernel of his being united with the Holy Spirit to become "one spirit".
The new birth takes place in the human spirit:
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6)
Regeneration Witness Lee & Watchman Nee teach regeneration occurs in the innermost nucleus of a person's being - the human spirit.
After being born again the Holy Spirit bears witness with the human spirit to which it is now joined that there is an "organic" relationship between God the believer's Father and the believer:
"The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God." (Rom 8:16)
We make no apologies for the fact that there is a spiritual dimension to human life. There is this realm of human life and that fact that it is rather mysterious does not mean that it is not real.
The radio antenea can substantiate the reality of Radio Waves. Without the use of the working antenea the marvelously designed radio cannot pick up the radio waves that are real and are in the air. And without the use of the regenerated human spirit one cannot touch God.
It is divine. It is mystical. And it is spiritual. And we offer you no apologies for proclaiming that the expience is real.
/BTW, I know exactly what you are talking about. I have laid prostrate on the ground in tears to the almighty as well.
I accept your testimony. However tears and groveling are not necessary. In fact they could be a destraction. God is not interested always in you groveling on the ground. Stand up like a man and use your praying spirit to touch God.
This account is by far not enough for me to assume that it is vain to excercise the praying spirit of man under the cleansing blood of Christ redemption to touch and substantiate that the resurrected Christ is a reality.
Can you provide credible, substantiated evidence of the existence of such an "organ" or existence of the spiritual besides anecdotal numinous experiences. The German theologian Rudolph Otto defines this experience you are talking about as the numinous or mysterium tremendum et fascinans (litterally meaning the mystery that repels and attracts).
That is not important to me, to provide evidence with some kind of mathematical certainty of something which requires our faith to begin with.
Rather, I would advise someone who says that his experience with prayer was frustrating, not to give up. That is if he is indeed serious.
You quote CS Lewis below. I have not yet read the quote. But C.S. Lewis also said that to speak of him searching for God as an athiest when he was one, was like speaking of a mouse searching for a cat.
Do you want God? Or do you want to get rid of God? CS Lewis went from the former to the latter like many of us also.
You know if you are a seeker for God. You know if you are seeker to rid yourself of and get away from any such experience. But if I did assume that you were eager to experience God I would not advize you to give up based on your above discribed disappointing time.
Sometimes I also did not receive the answer from God in the manner in which I wanted. I do not spend the rest of my life licking my wounds or feeling that I well never again pray.
I would seek to find what is the blockage. What is the stoppage. What is the sin that I cling to. Or what may be the thing I am unwilling to confess. Or maybe I have not trusted that the blood of Jesus has removed all sin. There is some difficulty. It is not the end of the road. And I would not feel sorry for myself that "Well, I prayed and nothing happened. So now I am bitter and will never again humble myself before any God."
Bluntly speaking, stuff like that is not necessary and is not effective.
"There is a spirit in man. And the breath of the Almighty gives him understanding."
There is a part of man which is designed to give man a taste of God and an understanding of God. The fact that it is very subjective does not mean that it cannot be real.
Nor do we who have experienced the "life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) go to the other extreme of counting ALL such subjective feelings as necessarily spiritual.
We do not intend to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Someone once aptly said "If you don't feel close to God, guess who moved."
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-10-2009 10:37 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 75 of 306 (493855)
01-11-2009 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by DevilsAdvocate
01-10-2009 10:37 AM


Re: In regards to the geneaology of Jesus
.S. Lewis writes:
Suppose you were told that there was a tiger in the next room: you would know that you were in danger and would probably feel fear. But if you were told "There is a ghost in the next room," and believed it, you would feel, indeed, what is often called fear, but of a different kind. It would not be based on the knowledge of danger, for no one is primarily afraid of what a ghost may do to him, but of the mere fact that it is a ghost. It is "uncanny" rather than dangerous, and the special kind of fear it excites may be called Dread. With the Uncanny one has reached the fringes of the Numinous. Now suppose that you were told simply "There is a might spirit in the room" and believed it. Your feelings would then be even less like the mere fear of danger: but the disturbance would be profound. You would feel wonder and a certain shrinking-described as awe, and the object which excites it is the Numinous.
I sure would like to know from what source you read this quote of CS Lewis.
If this came from some website or skeptical book I would like to see HOW the user of this quotation was USING it. What was he or she trying to prove.
Just quoting CS Lewis does not impress me that much. I would like to see the context in which this quotation was used:
1.) By Lewis himself
2.) By the referer who quoted Lewis (what point was he trying to make?)
I don't get the relevance of this quote at all. Is this your attempt to say "See, Christian apologist CS Lewis even said it is not reliable to speak of Spirit or the spiritual."?
Hey, I mean if you want a point for quoting C.S. Lewis, I don't care. Take one. And where was I speaking of dread or fear ???
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 01-10-2009 10:37 AM DevilsAdvocate 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