by MsGrowingGirl20 643 Replies latest members private
tec wrote:
(and if you follow your line of reasoning - something being written does not make it true - then why do you believe that they were illiterate?)
I still wonder if you deliberately create confusion. In the -context- of the story, they are illiterate.
Obviously something being written does not make it true. That's one reason people called historians exist. As EP noted, "with their fancy research and all."
Etude, I appreciate your work. Thanks.
Thanks InterestedOne!
"You can only have evidence that fails to sustain that something exists." = "It IS the evidence that discounts the idea of God". Even though it doesn't change your response, I don't see a contradiction and don't see why you fail to understand that it's a lost cause to insist anyone needs evidence to disprove God exists.Okay, we are having a communication problem. Because I have never insisted that someone needs evidence to disprove that God exists.
The only thing i stated in this thread was that Cofty's self-stated evidence against the existence of God does not concern me, and does not contradict my own. Obviously that means one of us is wrong. Since I know that Christ is here and speaking, then you can see where this puts me on the 'evidence' against Him.
C'mon, you have to do better than that. Where are the witnesses? If they're in the Bible, forget it. I would even say that in such a scenario, it may be completely true that the Biblical witnesses are telling the truth. The PROBLEM is that you can't rely on a document that uses itself for a source of authenticity. That's like me making any statement and asserting that it's factual because I say so.
You keep saying this... but I am not relying on that document. I can discuss it without thinking that it is the authority. In fact, I believe I stated that the authority is Christ, and that relying on something OVER him makes that something into an 'idol'.
I am perfectly aware that someone can be a witness and be wrong; hence testing their words, examining, and seeing for yourself.
And since you admit there are errors (obviously those that are internal and those that contradict a parallel secular account), how can you independently identify the internal ones and justify the points you consider non-errors? It's pretty messy, unless a voice guides you to the good parts and steers you away from the bad ones. I'm sorry, but I don't have such an advantage. I really would love to tap into some sort of supernatural knowledge that could provide me with uncommon information. The last time I felt I had that, I was thoroughly deceived.
I'm not sure you can identify the errors for certain... unless you have the source to go to to learn the truth.
A lot of what people think are errors though, are translation issues (these can be researched), and minor differences that make no difference at all to the over all message of Christ and of love... and that is corroborated between the various testimonies and letters.
"There are people who point their finger to Christ as well." Other than without the bible, right? OK. You don't have to cough up any names, just the way and means they come about this knowledge of Christ. You must admit that if there is reproducible method via which to achieve this, we can actually revolutionize the world.
Well... I am one of those people, giving witness to what I know,experience, hear.
"I do not think that my faith is self-contained. Christ is involved." But you see, that's the problem. Only you and no one but you can know this. Someone like me who does not have the privilege, means or access to the Christ in your head can possibly tap into your self-contained state.
And as long as you consider to think that such is impossible for you, then you will most likely not be able to know for yourself.
You could have the same means as I do... Christ. But as long as you do not think he is even real or alive or that he can speak... then how can you have faith in him?
If you don't really mind where the truth is written in order to support your belief, then make a simple experiment: try doing away with the Bible all-together (I don't mean burn it just not consider it for a moment) and see if any of your beliefs survives. Find other sources of truth that will support not only Christ but God and his purposes. Just try it. Hey, hey, hey...don't touch that Bible.
I rarely touch my bible, other than to provide something for someone else to see. Once in a while (and this is backward, I know this, and yet still do it at times) to verify to myself something the Spirit has shown/spoken/revealed to me.
In fact, the bible was a detriment to my faith at one point. I DID set it aside. Completely. Just to follow the Spirit. Even though I did not understand many things at the time, I was learning, and some things written in the bible seemed to be contradicting those things. (I say seemed, because I was looking at it through the glasses of the wts still). So I knew that i needed to set it aside, and just follow in faith.
I will give you one example of someone who understood something in spirit, something that is not taught and while it is backed in the bible, it is not what people interpret from the bible... and this woman (my mother) did not learn it from the bible.
My mother always believed that the Holy Spirit is Christ. Christ walked as 'Jesus' in the flesh, but he had to die, in order that He could become/return as the Holy Spirit.
When she told me this, i was studying with the witnesses, and I "corrected" her. But she was right and she knew that from the Spirit, not from any religion or from the bible.
Such a simple yet profound understanding. Christ died so that he could become Spirit, and pour his spirit out for us, and in us. For all of us who put our faith in Him and accept His gift of life.
"First... the only One you go to is Christ... if you want to hear Him (the Spirit of Truth) or if you want to know God." But how do I do that? Do I just start believing? Do you think I haven't already tried that? I spent decades doing that. How did I fail and you succeeded? There has to be a reproducible method that you can explain to me for how you "hear" him, how I "go" to him. Even if it involves some mombo-jumbo words, I'll do it. If you picture something more along the idea of acceptance (just let it flow, just believe), you really need to believe me that I've already done that. It actually was quite satisfactory, but it made my crash and burn all the more painful.
Ask... and keep asking.
Knock at the door... and keep knocking.
Ask the Father to send you His Son, his Truth, the Holy Spirit: Christ. Ask for ears to hear Him.
Look at Christ to see/know God. Stop looking at the bible as a whole (as in looking at what people wrote - mistakenly - about God, and instead look at the TRUTH that Christ shows us about God). Stop looking at what religions and men teach. Simply look to Christ, and ask for guidance and help.
I did all of the above. I also gave myself over to God and to His Son. To do whatever HE might want me to do. If that is send me somewhere, then that. I did not want to bury my 'talent' and keep it to myself, just so that I could know. But so that I could do as he wanted me to do.
I know you cannot make yourself believe. I am not certain why, but I understand that faith is not the possession of all men. (perhaps because some are so tied to the flesh and the tangible, that they cannot see past that... but I do not claim to know why that is) Just as I could not make myself NOT believe. But if you want to (and perhaps ask yourself also WHY you want to)... then ask him for help.
"Second... I have verification for me." OK. Are you saying that only you, and therefore only each individual person, can have verification while the rest of us remain clueless? So, is that a concession that for two people who have verification in Christ, each have their own separate verification? It's like two people driving in one car towards a destination and each one has his own and wildly different scenery. Hmm... it gets curiouser and curiouser.
Absolutely everyone has their own verification. I cannot rely on someone else's verification. It has to be real for me. Because we are to rely upon Christ... and not upon man. Otherwise we will get misled by all sorts of false prophets and wolves in sheeps clothing, as most everyone here can attest to via the wts.
I do not think that the scenery is different however. I think the scenery is the same... but each person MUST drive their own car.
Listen Tammy, I imagine that the descriptions and details you may provide me that amount to your experience are quite satisfying, soothing, fill you with security and love. That's fine. I don't wish you to lose that. But I don't agree that what you experience is based on any reliable evidence. Relating such feelings and experiences won't change the fundamental fact that their foundation is flawed. I'm will to go down that road in that car with you while you observe a different vista than I, as long as I'm driving and get there in one piece.
I respect your thoughts on this (and think the analogy with you driving made me grin). I do hope that you can see that we speak of two different foundations here.
"the bible does not make the claim that the apostles were all illiterate" The point of citing Acts 4:13 was to emphasize the "unschooled" and "ordinary" part. Think of what a school was in those days, if they even had such a thing for children. It was not, I repeat, was not the tradition for families to home-school their kids and teach them how to read. Not only were they poor, but at the very first indication that a kid could work, they put him or her to work. There was not time or purpose for reading given their economic condition social status. This is what we can learn from secular history. Why do we need to change the parallel history in the Bible to suit our purposes? If I were to use your logic, I would say that nowhere in the Bible does it say that these men could read or write or that they were taught at any point in their lives or that God or Christ gave them the gift to read and write miraculously. Sorry "unschooled and ordinary men" does mean illiterate.
I think that there are scholars that disagree with your assessment here, on the illiteracy of these times, in this people. I will look for them and get back to you.
So far I venture to say that there's probably more evidence that Zarathustra existed than that Christ existed, even though there is way more talk about later than the former. What I have learned about Christ is that whoever he was if he ever was, he had a very good and unifying message of peace and love. That prompted Mohandas Gandhi to say: "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Neither the message nor the popularity Christ achieved means he ever existed.
It does not; I agree.
Peace to you,
tammy
Since I know that Christ is here and speaking
Has he ever said anything that could not be known by non-superntatural means? If so what?
Tammy - If you take the bible out the equation you wouldn't even know that Jesus existed.
Actually according to your mentor he doesn't exist...
When I came to know the One many CALL "Jesus" I came to know that "Jesus" has never done anything for me... because there is no such person. - Shelby
there is no "Jesus." Else, he would ANSWER everyone CALLING on him. - Shelby
Has he ever said anything that could not be known by non-superntatural means? If so what?
Yes, he has! But you won't believe it as anything other than gobbledygook... until it IS known by non-'supernatural' means.
I think we have had this conversation before. Or I could have had it with someone else and am mistaking you as that person.
If you take the bible out the equation you wouldn't even know that Jesus existed.
If I take all the testimony about him out of the equation, then I might not know that he ever existed. But people would still be led by Him, and God. The truths taught by them would still be taught, in spirit, to those with the faith to hear.
Aguest is not my mentor... she and I share the same mentor though, which might be what confuses you.
She is also speaking of more than just the name... but the image given to that name... the hollywood version of Christ, so to speak. The 'Jesus' of religion (hollywood), rather than the Spirit of Christ, of God.
Peace to you,
tammy
Yes, he has!
What exactly?
Really wonderful posts Tammy.
Loz x
Loz arrives with pom poms...
How very kind Cofty, but no alas, no pom poms
Loz x
Peace to you, Loz, and thank you.
Loz arrives with pom poms...
You going to say that to everyone who commends someone for their post, Cofty?
What exactly?
You've read posts I have made of things revealed to me. You do not buy them, but they are out there for anyone to read. You have also read things that have been revealed to others... and you don't buy those either. You won't buy anything until it has been proven. I understand that about you. But you are asking me for something that right out of the box, you cannnot and will not accept.
Peace to you,
tammy
