- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi Stu,
There is only one court that matters.
The first few witnesses have spoken but you give them no validity.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 12 2008,14:44) Hi Stu,
There is only one court that matters.
The first few witnesses have spoken but you give them no validity.
Sorry, what witnesses? Witnesses to what exactly?Stuart
Quote (Towshab @ Jan. 12 2008,13:53) Quote (kenrch @ Jan. 11 2008,20:38) Gee you missed it TOW-STU, that's spiritual eyes! 
You admit you have never tasted of the Spirit don't you? At least you did!
Very weak. No proof, no evidence, so the best you can do is repeat Christian philosophy. Sad.
What's sad Tow -Stu is that you can't see. Just as PAUL. Perhaps God will show you just how blind you have been just as HE did Paul.I believe just as soon as HE is finished with you He will remove the scales from your eyes. Paul also was a tempter punishing those who believed.
Surely just as promised all these things are happening!
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,14:41) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 12 2008,14:02) Quote (Towshab @ Jan. 12 2008,13:56) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 11 2008,20:39) Hi Tow,
First note that Jesus is a historical figure and rather than diverting
you should perhaps acknowledge that Jesus was significant in Israel's history?
How so? How was he historical? No historian spoke of him. The only historical significance he had was that certain books were written about him that others used to have cause (or reason) to kill Jews. What a legacy.
Hi Tow,
So we need to find a historian and Josephus is not good enough?
I have a feeling that no evidence is good enough.
Back to Moses?
As has already been pointed out, the evidence that can be seen in Josephus is adulterated and fleeting at best. To believe Jesus existed at all is historically very doubtful, let alone the extrordinary claims that would not even stand up in a law court for lack of an eyewitness account. And people make that the basis of their lives. Astonishing, but perhaps very human.Stuart
Stu,You are the type of person who is a straight shooter. Yet you claim that the historicity of Jesus is “very doubtful”?
Stu, the majority of historians, archeaologists and scholars DO THINK HE EXISTED. And I am talking full spectrum here including many secular and athiestic scholars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
You have some knowledge they dont?
Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 12 2008,15:55) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,14:41) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 12 2008,14:02) Quote (Towshab @ Jan. 12 2008,13:56) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 11 2008,20:39) Hi Tow,
First note that Jesus is a historical figure and rather than diverting
you should perhaps acknowledge that Jesus was significant in Israel's history?
How so? How was he historical? No historian spoke of him. The only historical significance he had was that certain books were written about him that others used to have cause (or reason) to kill Jews. What a legacy.
Hi Tow,
So we need to find a historian and Josephus is not good enough?
I have a feeling that no evidence is good enough.
Back to Moses?
As has already been pointed out, the evidence that can be seen in Josephus is adulterated and fleeting at best. To believe Jesus existed at all is historically very doubtful, let alone the extrordinary claims that would not even stand up in a law court for lack of an eyewitness account. And people make that the basis of their lives. Astonishing, but perhaps very human.Stuart
Stu,You are the type of person who is a straight shooter. Yet you claim that the historicity of Jesus is “very doubtful”?
Stu, the majority of historians, archeaologists and scholars DO THINK HE EXISTED. And I am talking full spectrum here including many secular and athiestic scholars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
You have some knowledge they dont?
Let's settle on 'doubtful' then. I'll happily remove the very, as I think the hypothesis that Jesus did not exist has as much credibility as the one that he did.'Most scholars' includes, I imagine, a very great number whose basis for a continued livelihood depends on the supposition that there was at least an historical Jesus. That is not to say that they are wrong, but if all historians were agreed that Jesus almost certainly existed then I would be strongly influenced by them putting their academic reputations on it. As it happens they don't, for good reason. As David has correctly pointed out, the evidence for many other historical characters who are commonly accepted to have existed is similar to that for the existence of Jesus, but the important difference is that in those other cases a whole worldview and attempts at converting others to it are not predicated on their. The existence of Jesus is important to many who perhaps do not realise what a close thing it actually is.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,14:35) Quote (Not3in1 @ Jan. 12 2008,11:12) The nature of faith is based on God's Word as recorded in the Bible (both OT and NT). What do you do when you see this base as faulty? What happens to your faith when you find out that the base contains the truth but everyone that reads it receives various truths (and some that are contradictory to other's truths)? Can the basis for faith be trusted? If not, is it possible for faith to remain?
My faith is gasping for air….
So you are the most qualified believer here to comment on the nature of faith. The original question was why does faith need so much nurturing? Yours seems to be in need of bottled oxygen.Stuart
Hey Stu,Do you have any “bottled” faith lying around? You see the bible teaches that even our faith is a gift from God, so really it's not even my fault that I am faultering…..it's God's for not giving me a larger gift of faith!
Seriously though, I believe that faith needs so much nurturing because largely it's based on hope. When you hope for something it's because you don't have it yet. There is a certain amount of insecurities that arise from “getting your hopes up too high” and then crashing when you don't receive what you are hoping for. I'm experiencing a bit of this now and I refer to it as my faith is “gasping for air….”. In other words, in my search for solid truth, I am losing hope. I just don't believe that absolute truth exists anymore as it relates to God.
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,14:45) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 12 2008,14:44) Hi Stu,
There is only one court that matters.
The first few witnesses have spoken but you give them no validity.
Sorry, what witnesses? Witnesses to what exactly?Stuart
Hi Stu,
Perhaps you have a copy of the bible?
God spoke through the prophets and they feature there.
Most of them suffered and died for the glorious privilege.
Then you must have heard of Jesus in the NT section.
Died too as it is the wont of men to kill his messengers.
He was more than a prophet being a living vessel of God Himself .
His words are spirit and life and those who obey them begin a fresh new life.
They too get mocked and persecuted but hey they know it is worth it.
Wanna throw a rock?Quote (Not3in1 @ Jan. 12 2008,17:01) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,14:35) Quote (Not3in1 @ Jan. 12 2008,11:12) The nature of faith is based on God's Word as recorded in the Bible (both OT and NT). What do you do when you see this base as faulty? What happens to your faith when you find out that the base contains the truth but everyone that reads it receives various truths (and some that are contradictory to other's truths)? Can the basis for faith be trusted? If not, is it possible for faith to remain?
My faith is gasping for air….
So you are the most qualified believer here to comment on the nature of faith. The original question was why does faith need so much nurturing? Yours seems to be in need of bottled oxygen.Stuart
Hey Stu,Do you have any “bottled” faith lying around? You see the bible teaches that even our faith is a gift from God, so really it's not even my fault that I am faultering…..it's God's for not giving me a larger gift of faith!
Seriously though, I believe that faith needs so much nurturing because largely it's based on hope. When you hope for something it's because you don't have it yet. There is a certain amount of insecurities that arise from “getting your hopes up too high” and then crashing when you don't receive what you are hoping for. I'm experiencing a bit of this now and I refer to it as my faith is “gasping for air….”. In other words, in my search for solid truth, I am losing hope. I just don't believe that absolute truth exists anymore as it relates to God.
I think while there may or may not be truth in what you call god, there is such a thing as truth, and we can get quite close to it. As Son of Light pointed out, Kant reminded us that we cannot know for sure that our senses are not deceiving us, but I think that there is enough corroboration between different areas of investigation to give us some real assurance that there are some things that we do know quite well, and most importantly we know exactly how close we can get to those truths before we can know no more. The two limits that spring to mind, that are limited only by the kind of space-time we live in (and that we are trapped in anyway), are Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle (you can't know exactly where a tiny particle is AND how fast it is going at the same time, and what is called the 'grain' of space-time, a distance of about 0.000000000000000000000000000000001mm. We can't possibly see things smaller than this length, because it is impossible to get enough energy together to do the looking without that energy collapsing into a black hole. The truth going on below those limits if we could know it, would be the weirdest things for us to try and imagine.So we actually have a pretty good idea of how close it is possible to get to physical truth.
People here tend to question what we objectively know, but not in a useful way, just in a way designed to confuse. They then put up a 'truth' which is a human invention and which is one of 2,000,000,000 of its kind. Just look at the number of different kinds of christianity displayed here alone. What truth is present there? I don't think we are anywhere near the limits of Heisenberg or space-time grain, yet already as you say no truth is obvious.
Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 12 2008,17:05) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,14:45) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 12 2008,14:44) Hi Stu,
There is only one court that matters.
The first few witnesses have spoken but you give them no validity.
Sorry, what witnesses? Witnesses to what exactly?Stuart
Hi Stu,
Perhaps you have a copy of the bible?
God spoke through the prophets and they feature there.
Most of them suffered and died for the glorious privilege.
Then you must have heard of Jesus in the NT section.
Died too as it is the wont of men to kill his messengers.
He was more than a prophet being a living vessel of God Himself .
His words are spirit and life and those who obey them begin a fresh new life.
They too get mocked and persecuted but hey they know it is worth it.
Wanna throw a rock?
Like I said, what witnesses? Witnesses to what? I don't think there is anything to throw a rock at!Stuart
Dear Professor Stu,
I hope you do not mind me bothering you but the matter is urgent and we do not want the whole world to know what I am going to have to tell you.
The reason I am writing to you is to inform you of the alarming early results of the Scandanavian double blind crossover W.A.C.K.O. trial on faith.
Unfortunately results are not looking good. It seems that faith in it's native state is very unstable. Unless it is converted into action within a few days it seems to degenerate into useless inert philosophy or actually become dead religion.
On the back of the continuing failure of the Department of Evolution project to convert theories into facts the future is looking particularly glum for not just the theology group but for the whole speculation industry.
I think we can keep this under our hats in the meantime and hope things improve in later trials.
Hi Nick
Quote I hope you do not mind me bothering you but the matter is urgent and we do not want the whole world to know what I am going to have to tell you.
That’s fine. I am used to being patronised here.Quote The reason I am writing to you is to inform you of the alarming early results of the Scandanavian double blind crossover W.A.C.K.O. trial on faith. Unfortunately results are not looking good. It seems that faith in it's native state is very unstable. Unless it is converted into action within a few days it seems to degenerate into useless inert philosophy or actually become dead religion. On the back of the continuing failure of the Department of Evolution project to convert theories into facts the future is looking particularly glum for not just the theology group but for the whole speculation industry. I think we can keep this under our hats in the meantime and hope things improve in later trials.
Move over Monty Python and make room for a comedy genius.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,18:46) Hi Nick Quote I hope you do not mind me bothering you but the matter is urgent and we do not want the whole world to know what I am going to have to tell you.
That’s fine. I am used to being patronised here.Quote The reason I am writing to you is to inform you of the alarming early results of the Scandanavian double blind crossover W.A.C.K.O. trial on faith. Unfortunately results are not looking good. It seems that faith in it's native state is very unstable. Unless it is converted into action within a few days it seems to degenerate into useless inert philosophy or actually become dead religion. On the back of the continuing failure of the Department of Evolution project to convert theories into facts the future is looking particularly glum for not just the theology group but for the whole speculation industry. I think we can keep this under our hats in the meantime and hope things improve in later trials.
Move over Monty Python and make room for a comedy genius.Stuart
Actually it was kinda funny, Stu. Give him credit.
Quote (Son of Light @ Jan. 12 2008,19:04) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,18:46) Hi Nick Quote I hope you do not mind me bothering you but the matter is urgent and we do not want the whole world to know what I am going to have to tell you.
That’s fine. I am used to being patronised here.Quote The reason I am writing to you is to inform you of the alarming early results of the Scandanavian double blind crossover W.A.C.K.O. trial on faith. Unfortunately results are not looking good. It seems that faith in it's native state is very unstable. Unless it is converted into action within a few days it seems to degenerate into useless inert philosophy or actually become dead religion. On the back of the continuing failure of the Department of Evolution project to convert theories into facts the future is looking particularly glum for not just the theology group but for the whole speculation industry. I think we can keep this under our hats in the meantime and hope things improve in later trials.
Move over Monty Python and make room for a comedy genius.Stuart
Actually it was kinda funny, Stu. Give him credit.
Well I suppose humour is funny to those who understand it.Is it trying to make some satirical point? It doesn't actually mean anything to me.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,01:46) Hi Nick Quote I hope you do not mind me bothering you but the matter is urgent and we do not want the whole world to know what I am going to have to tell you.
That’s fine. I am used to being patronised here.Quote The reason I am writing to you is to inform you of the alarming early results of the Scandanavian double blind crossover W.A.C.K.O. trial on faith. Unfortunately results are not looking good. It seems that faith in it's native state is very unstable. Unless it is converted into action within a few days it seems to degenerate into useless inert philosophy or actually become dead religion. On the back of the continuing failure of the Department of Evolution project to convert theories into facts the future is looking particularly glum for not just the theology group but for the whole speculation industry. I think we can keep this under our hats in the meantime and hope things improve in later trials.
Move over Monty Python and make room for a comedy genius.Stuart
Stu,Give Nick a break. That was the longest post of his own words I've ever seen. He probably had to take a nap after writing it.
Quote (Towshab @ Jan. 13 2008,00:13) Quote (Stu @ Jan. 12 2008,01:46) Hi Nick Quote I hope you do not mind me bothering you but the matter is urgent and we do not want the whole world to know what I am going to have to tell you.
That’s fine. I am used to being patronised here.Quote The reason I am writing to you is to inform you of the alarming early results of the Scandanavian double blind crossover W.A.C.K.O. trial on faith. Unfortunately results are not looking good. It seems that faith in it's native state is very unstable. Unless it is converted into action within a few days it seems to degenerate into useless inert philosophy or actually become dead religion. On the back of the continuing failure of the Department of Evolution project to convert theories into facts the future is looking particularly glum for not just the theology group but for the whole speculation industry. I think we can keep this under our hats in the meantime and hope things improve in later trials.
Move over Monty Python and make room for a comedy genius.Stuart
Stu,Give Nick a break. That was the longest post of his own words I've ever seen. He probably had to take a nap after writing it.
You Guys crack me up.
I don't even read the morning newspaper any more,
I come straight to this forum.Tim
Another classic for the books. From another thread, kenrch said
Quote Satan appeals to the intellect, human logic. Once again, we have another Christian implying that Christianity is not for intellectual people.
Maybe some folks on here should purchase this: The Power of Myth (VHS) .
The DVD version can be found here.
By Faith We Understand
Hebrews 11:1-3
1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good testimony. 3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
