Well, after breaking 2000 comments on the previous thread, I think it’s time to move to a new one. Feel free to continue the conversation here.
Also, I want to make a note about future posts. The tone on this blog for the last month or so has been decidedly different than what it used to be. While that’s definitely made things interesting, I’d like to move back to a tone more in line with the way things used to be. So going forward, I want the comments on all new posts to remain civil. We can all make our points, and I expect to see a wide range of opinions. But I don’t want to get into name-calling and bashing when we can’t all agree on particular issues. Let’s try to stay focused on the points and not get side-tracked with personal stuff. Let’s also keep each comment substantive so we don’t rack up so many comments in such a short period of time that it’s hard for everyone to keep track.
If you don’t feel like you can participate within those guidelines, then feel free to continue posting within this thread (and any future “Kathy” threads, if they’re needed), because I won’t be enforcing any guidelines here. But if you want to comment on any other posts, you’ll need to abide by the rules I just laid out. Otherwise, your comment will be subject to deletion, and after a warning, you might find yourself banned from at least that thread, if not the entire blog.
If there are any questions, let me know.
Thanks
Finding Truth 
and kathy, fine, christianity had martyrs – now how are they better or more convincing that other martyrs?
LikeLike
Kathy, the point Ruth has been making is this: there’s no actual historical documentation to say the apostles were martyred. We only have stories, and the stories are not at all consistent. At the same time, it’s easy to see why stories about martyrs would have been convenient for early Christians to use as evidence, just as you’re doing here. So there’s an obvious incentive to manufacture or embellish such stories, and the fact that we have multiple, conflicting versions for many of these disciples doesn’t help authenticity.
Maybe they really were martyred as you believe, but there’s also good reason to be skeptical of those claims. That’s why the rest of us don’t find them very impressive
LikeLike
@ Kathy,
I just really don’t know what else to say. No matter what I say if it doesn’t agree with you, it will likely be dismissed as being biased.
I think it is likely, based on my reason and logic, that many of the stories of how most of the disciples died have been greatly embellished. I believe that a few of the disciples were martyred.
LikeLike
Nate,
“Maybe they really were martyred as you believe, but there’s also good reason to be skeptical of those claims. That’s why the rest of us don’t find them very impressive”
Do you think there is good reason to believe they were martyred? This has been my question to Ruth, and neither of you are acknowledging it, much less answering it… why??
LikeLike
Ruth,
“I think it is likely, based on my reason and logic, that many of the stories of how most of the disciples died have been greatly embellished. I believe that a few of the disciples were martyred.”
Well, a “few” is better than none. But I’ll just point out again that it’s more reasonable to believe that all were martyred, except John, which, based on the evidence, says he was not martyred.
I don’t know what your evidence is to believe that the stories were “greatly embellished”? All your links show is that there are different versions for some of them.. but not for most.. which also makes me question your belief that “few” were martyred.
Your choice of words.. “greatly” embellished and “few” were martyred.. without any actual evidence to back it up those two words just continues to support my assertion of your bias/ lack of objectivity.. I know this bothers you when I make this claim, but I’m just being honest about how I see it.. based on the evidence (your words, our exchanges) that I’ve presented.
And also your point about how even if they were all martyred that wouldn’t “prove” Christianity as true. I never claimed it proved anything.. I’m claiming it is compelling evidence. This statement makes you seem overly defensive.. it shows a bias that you don’t want it to matter as to the Truth of Christianity.. but, it does matter.. a lot.
” No matter what I say if it doesn’t agree with you, it will likely be dismissed as being biased.”
You are using this as an excuse to not answer my question that you’ve never answered to begin with.. stating that I will likely react a certain way isn’t a valid reason for not giving an answer.. it’s clearly an excuse so you don’t have to answer.. but it’s not fair.. it’s dishonest. I’ve answered all your questions, haven’t I?
I STILL have no answer to the question of which you believe is most likely to have happened to the disciples… STILL.
LikeLike
So, to summarize, I still don’t know which religion Nate believes has the most evidence to support it’s claimed “truth”/Truth. Which I know the answer is Christianity.. by FAR.. has the most evidence to support it’s Truth. I think it’s very telling that no none here, including and especially Nate, can acknowledge this. It “tells” that there is a definite lack of objectivity/ honesty being applied to the debate. And, again, this is NOT the way to “find truth”.. it’s a way to stay in ignorance.. because.. as the saying goes…. “ignorance is bliss”.
And I still don’t know what Ruth would bet on as to the fate of the disciples (martyred or not).. she hasn’t stated which she believes is the most likely probability of the majority of them.. as she says.. we are going in circles.. because SHE can’t give a direct answer. She says that a “few” were martyred.. so is that your answer Ruth? In an indirect way? You would bet that most of the disciples WEREN’T martyred? That’s half the answer.. the other half would be WHY you disagree with my assessment that it makes more sense that they were martyred because..
““We all know that Christians were persecuted and under threat for spreading the Gospel. There’s no real reason to NOT believe that the disciples weren’t killed for doing this since they were the ones who were the most active in spreading the Gospel after Jesus’ death. That’s enough for me.. but if you want to post any evidence that supposedly argues against this belief, go ahead.. I’ll read it.”
You’re half way there Ruth.. I don’t see your reasoning that a “few” were martyred.. can you PLEASE explain this??
LikeLike
This IS my point..
Ruth asked..
me: “You may genuinely believe your arguments.. but that won’t excuse you.. it just means you are deliberately ignoring the truth on a deeper level.”
Ruth: “That won’t excuse me from what? I’ve evidently been genuinely convinced I was a Christian and now genuinely believe the contrary and I was damned either way. ”
CHOOSING to NOT apply objectivity and honesty WON’T excuse you on that day of judgment.
Deliberate ignorance won’t get you off the hook. It’s actually a sin in and of itself.. it’s dishonesty.
I’m not telling anyone what to believe.. I’m trying to encourage honest objectivity. And I believe that I’ve shown, with my questions.. and the subsequent LACK of answers.. and elaborate efforts to AVOID giving the honest answers.. that THIS.. IS.. THE problem with liberals/ atheists.
LikeLike
No, Kathy, you aren’t “telling” anyone what to believe, but you’re doing your damndest to get everyone on this blog to believe as you do. If you haven’t figured this out by now, let me be the first to tell you … it ain’t gonna’ happen.
Every person contributing has given you their honest answers. It’s just that YOU have chosen not to accept what they have said or in some cases, submitted, because it didn’t fit your personal standard for “objectivity.”
Essentially, it’s a stand-off.
LikeLike
(Nate, I may take advantage of the sandbox here…)
Kathy,
Re August 4, 2014 at 1:08 am:
Firstly, I did give “him” an “honest chance”.
Secondly, I evaluated the available evidence and arguments, and made a “judgement” about what I consider most likely–namely that Yahweh as described in the Bible does not exist as a real person or deity. If “he” wants to show up and clear up the question of his existence, then we can talk about our judgements of his display of character.
Silly me, I thought I was trying to find out what’s true, regardless of my feelings about it.
If Yahweh is a fable, then no, I don’t want “him”. If he’s not, then I want to know.
If hearsay, legend, and rumors from late, contradictory, and biased (proselytizing) sources count as “evidence”…
Some atheists may fit your description. Others don’t. And most of those hanging around here have given every reason to think that they sought truth above “desire for [an alleged] god”.
Now if you meant to aim that at me as an accusation, that I disbelieve just because I don’t want to submit, then speaking for myself, I say: BULL. SHIT.
And no, I’m not “angry at God”. I’m angry that I was [albeit unintentionally] deceived for three+ decades, and (moreso right now) I’m angry at you for your repeated accusations, based on…sigh…well, I’ll stop it there and just say, based on nothing substantial.
It seems the concept of weak (or agnostic) atheism is lost on you.
I’m not arguing that there exist no deities, though that may be the case. I’m saying I see insufficient evidence to think that any have revealed themselves to us.
No, I can’t imagine why a (deistic) god might set things in motion, and then leave us alone. But if it were true, I wouldn’t presume to know the mind of such a god who hasn’t even chosen to reveal itself to us.
Now, if an ostensibly omnibenevolent theistic god had revealed “him”self to us–especially if the penalty for simple disbelief is eternal torture (or annhilation, for that matter)–then at a minimum, you can be damned sure I expect more convincing evidence than what I’ve found.
Not my job to prove a negative. You’re the one making the positive claim; it’s your job to substantiate it. As of yet, you’ve not provided one primary, contemporary source substantiating even your claim that the disciples were martyred. Those that do exist are contradictory, which is sufficient reason for me to treat them with skepticism.
The article you linked to did not make one citation. Essentially it amounted to “trust me, they were martyed, the tradition says so”. No, sorry, I don’t trust extraordinary claims without so much as ordinary evidence.
Again, you mischaracterize my argument. (“The” argument?) It’s not “God doesn’t exist”; it’s “Yahweh doesn’t exist”. I do leave room for the possibility of deism, at least.
No, I can’t answer the question of “why is there anything?”. I DON’T KNOW. And if no god has revealed itself to us, then it’s quite plausible that we wouldn’t know yet–in fact, we may never know.
You think you can answer that question with “godditit”, but that creates a new question: why does God exist?
He “just is”, you say? Well then, by the same token, why can’t the universe “just exist”? Or the multiverse, or the universe generator (whatever that may be), or…
I’ll even let you in on a little secret–personally, as of yet, for reasons I can’t yet fully explain, I still find a god hypothesis (not your god hypothesis) more intuitive on that question. But so what? I won’t presume that my little intuition, by itself, will provide me with the answer to the fundamental nature of reality itself.
Would you please stop with the accusations of dishonesty?
Funny, “it’s just how it is” sounds like “because I said so”, which–without an explanation–amounts to “making up a rule”. I also think it’s lousy parenting.
Funny–I require neither atonement nor blood sacrifice if someone “sins” against me–repentance will do. I guess Yahweh just likes killing stuff.
Again with “just how it is”, i.e. no explanation.
I read the article. More “just because” and “the Bible says so”.
No one but the writers of the Bible. (Including the anonymous and pseudonymous ones.) And the people who suggested or taught you the doctrines through which you interpret it. I’m not saying that you’re not using your brain, but really, it’s absurd to suggest that no one so much as influenced your beliefs, as it would be absurd to say for any of us.
However, that’s not what I’m talking about anyway. I’m talking about the concept that you’re a wretched sinner, you’re broken, you need Yahweh to fix you… I’m sure you’re quite capable of administering those beatings yourself. With some help from the Bible. And your pastor.
Sorry, not omniscient, and the gods are giving me the silent treatment…
Also, I discussed this above.
“You all” would naturally seem to include me in your accusation. And since you are alleging “complete hypocrisy”, I expect you’ll easily be able to provide several examples of me being a hypocrite, yes? So let’s have them–or PISS OFF with your unfounded accusations.
Also, FWIW, as I said earlier, I didn’t even particularly want to get into all of this with you anyway. I just wanted you to understand that we made an honest attempt at assessing the evidence, and our conclusions differ from yours.
———-
Now, with all that said: there are other comments here that I had intended to address, but my time remains limited, and my interest level in this soap opera is waning. So I make no promises as to whether I will or won’t reply again.
LikeLike
Rata.. sigh.. my interest is waning too.. you all just don’t get it.
“It’s enough evidence to give God an honest chance.. without judging Him.
Firstly, I did give “him” an “honest chance”.
I wouldn’t know.. only you and God know if that’s true. All I can do is evaluate your words and form an opinion. And, based on your words, I’m guessing you did NOT give Him an honest chance. A lot of this opinion is based on the way you have repeatedly JUDGED God. It’s a major clue.
“Secondly, I evaluated the available evidence and arguments, and made a “judgement” about what I consider most likely–namely that Yahweh as described in the Bible does not exist as a real person or deity. If “he” wants to show up and clear up the question of his existence, then we can talk about our judgements of his display of character.”
Wow.. you illustrate a complete lack of humility.. not only that but you’re full of incredible arrogance.. demanding that God cater to YOU by revealing Himself on YOUR command… MORE clues that you probably haven’t given God an honest chance.
“Seek and you shall find”.. it’s not all about the evidence. It’s about what you seek, what you desire.”
“Silly me, I thought I was trying to find out what’s true, regardless of my feelings about it.”
I said it wasn’t “all” about the evidence.. and it isn’t. If you don’t want to find God and know Him.. no amount of evidence will be enough.. you’ve all demonstrated that here very clearly. And it’s how your Creator WANTS it. Don’t like that? Then you can make sure and let Him know when you see Him.
“I find that atheists don’t desire God.. and therefore, they aren’t going to find Him.
Even though there’s evidence that our Creator gave the ultimate sacrifice for us, atheists don’t seem to care, they just prefer to believe that God isn’t real.. so they can go on living to please themselves. -me
If hearsay, legend, and rumors from late, contradictory, and biased (proselytizing) sources count as “evidence”… ”
How is it any different from what we have for any other history from that far back??… that I bet you willingly accept.
Yes, believe it or not but it IS evidence! But, YES, you DO have to weed through it. You do have to use your brain and apply OBJECTIVITY and reason. You have to DISCERN the information. But if you are lead by your pride and ego, you won’t be able to apply objectivity and reason and discern correctly. And AGAIN, the Bible instructs us on how to be discerning and avoid the traps of pride. But you all have dismissed God and His wisdom in the Bible so you are your own victims…despite my efforts to get you to see through those blinders and truly apply honesty and objectivity.
“I’m not arguing that there exist no deities, though that may be the case. I’m saying I see insufficient evidence to think that any have revealed themselves to us.”
And I’m saying that you don’t see the evidence because of your blatant lack of objectivity. There is common sense evidence along with factual evidence. That you don’t think it’s “sufficient” won’t matter.. because again, you don’t get to dictate how it’s going to be.. that would be YOUR CREATOR who dictates the conditions and “rules” of how He reveals Himself to us and what is required of us. And it’s entirely HIS right to do so. That’s another thing that the liberal minded have trouble with.. respecting the rights of others… even God.
I see that the evidence is sufficient enough to make an HONEST effort to give God a chance. And I see bias from you and others here. All I’m trying to do is help you find your objectivity.
Maybe YOU can answer these questions that Ruth and Nate refuse to answer.. these questions and how they are answered, OR NOT, are much of what I base my accusations of bias on.
1) Do you believe it is more likely or less likely that the disciples were martyred? I contend that it is MORE likely because:
“““We all know that Christians were persecuted and under threat for spreading the Gospel. There’s no real reason to NOT believe that the disciples weren’t killed for doing this since they were the ones who were the most active in spreading the Gospel after Jesus’ death. That’s enough for me.. but if you want to post any evidence that supposedly argues against this belief, go ahead.. I’ll read it.”
So, if you disagree with this point, can you explain why? Why you believe it is LESS likely that the disciples were martyred?
2) Which religion, of the most prominent ones, do you feel has the most compelling evidence to support it’s claimed “truth”/Truth?
Keep in mind that “evidence” is not “proof”.. please look up the word if you aren’t sure.
And also, understand that this question is NOT asking which YOU believe to be true.. only which you feel has the most compelling evidence to support it’s claims.
I typed a prediction but deleted it.. I’m going to think positively..
LikeLike
Nan, you said:
“No, Kathy, you aren’t “telling” anyone what to believe, but you’re doing your damndest to get everyone on this blog to believe as you do. If you haven’t figured this out by now, let me be the first to tell you … it ain’t gonna’ happen.
Every person contributing has given you their honest answers. It’s just that YOU have chosen not to accept what they have said or in some cases, submitted, because it didn’t fit your personal standard for “objectivity.”
Essentially, it’s a stand-off.”
Nan, my motive is not to get you all to believe as I do.. I DO want you to believe in God, but this has nothing to do with me. And the WAY I’m trying to do this is to help you all see that you aren’t applying objectivity. And I’m thoroughly convinced that pride is behind your lack of objectivity. Your comment supports this.. calling the differences a “stand off”.. and accusing me of being motivated by MY pride.. instead of doing what I believe God wants me to do.. what all believers are supposed to do.. help others to give God an HONEST chance. It’s not about me.. but your words make it seem that it’s not about God (or THE question) to you.. but about who’s right.. or who will “win”.
What we (Christians) are supposed to do is appeal to the hearts of others, to get them to let Jesus into their hearts but I think there are a lot of people who aren’t going to respond to Him in that way, not in the beginning.. there are many people who use logical / scientific arguments and that’s where I feel I can possibly make a difference with my arguments… like showing people of this mindset that they aren’t being truly objective when they are reasoning “logically” against God’s existence. I know I’ve given extremely valid arguments that show there is a definite lack of objectivity/ deep down honesty.. like I have with Nate and Ruth and others here.. but, I’m learning as I go along here.. and, I’m now thinking that I’ve got to find out if the Bible actually supports this approach of mine. I know Paul reasoned often with the Jews about the theology of Jesus and God’s new plan. But I’m not sure if what I’m doing is what I should be doing.. I don’t know that if I say that “Jesus loves you”.. “He died to pay for your sins”.. and all these things that I know you all have heard many times already, if this will make any difference.. but, I’m seeing that my approach isn’t making any difference for sure. Pointing out someone’s lack of objectivity isn’t going to magically make objectivity appear. It’s that very bias that will prevent them from seeing the truth that I’m pointing out.. it’s that very pride that I point out that will kick into high gear and block my attempts to help people humble themselves.
Humility is a Christian REQUIREMENT. It’s a fundamental aspect of Christianity. And the idea of humbling ourselves before God is something that often offends the liberal minded.. it threatens their pride.. it goes against what is controlling them. And it doesn’t seem to matter that Jesus humbled Himself more than any human being could ever possibly do.
So, it’s becoming more and more evident that I’m fighting a losing battle. At least SOMETHING was accomplished by my being on this blog. I’ve got to rethink what I’m doing.. if it’s the way God wants me to be “evangelizing”. So, thanks everyone.. I hope I’ve at least caused you to think about things from a different angle at least. If anyone has any sincere questions, I’ll be glad to answer them/ give my point of view, but I can’t do this circular game playing anymore.. something I’ve probably been guilty of myself a time or two.. it’s just not accomplishing anything positive. And it wastes way too much time. I can’t let the issues that others have, become issues for me.. I’ve got enough of my own to deal with.
LikeLike
“Unless, of course, it suddenly starts to go somewhere…”” – You mean if Kathy suddenly pops in on Saturday with COMPELLING EVIDENCE for the validity of Hinduism? Any bookmakers in the audience?
LikeLike
“Ruth, I asked for an explanation in your words.. not links of which you gave samples that did NOT in any way provide a valid argument that the disciples weren’t martyred.” – Translation, Ruth: “I don’t want to have to do any work, like follow up on links and actually READ anything! I just want you to deliver it to me on a silver platter so that I can dismiss it with a wave of the hand, you silly Ninny!”
You have to learn Kathy-ese, Ruth.
LikeLike
KAthy,
“1) Do you believe it is more likely or less likely that the disciples were martyred?:”
me: I dont really care, but I think some disciples were martyred. I think some of the martyr stories were embellished, but i still find it moot, as people dying for something only proves that they died for something and is only evidence for their belief in that thing they died for.
belief in a thing does not equal the actuality of that thing. and again, since all religions have martyrs, can you show how christian martyrs are superior to all the others if you’re going to continue and maintain that dying people are good evidence for truth?
“2) Which religion, of the most prominent ones, do you feel has the most compelling evidence to support it’s claimed “truth”/Truth?”
Me: again, what do you mean by truth? We’ve all answered this question, and then you said that you werent asking which was true in it’s claim of divine origins…. so how then and in what way do you mean “true” if not in their claims of being divine?
Additionally, you clearly think Christianity has more credentials for this “truth” you’re looking for. Can you provide evidence for this – evidence that other religions do not also claim to have? then do the same for which version of christianity you think is the right one?
and why limit your request to the “most prominent ones?”
and going back to #1, I can sit here and insist on arguing that buddhist martyrs are superior because they’re better and common sense shows that the factual evidence surrounding their martyrdom is widely accepted, etc, etc…
I can say it over and over and over again. Would that convince you? What if I said you werent being objective? would you agree with me then? What if i said common sense shows that i was right? then? now what if i just repeated that buddhist martyrs were superior?
if that doesnt convince you, why do you think it would work when you do the same thing, except in regard to christians?
Maybe you can answer my questions and requests for clarification this time?
LikeLike
She seems totally unable to accept, “We don’t know” for an answer, which is likely the reason she feels the need to stick “god” into the creation of the universe and the origin of life – if “We don’t know,” then “god”!
I’m just surprised that she seems to have all of this time to comment, while immersing herself in the study of Hinduism —
LikeLike
@Nate – the martyrs – and once again, even if they all were, it’s only evidence of belief, not evidence of validity.
LikeLike
@Kathy
lol
Welcome to Groundhog Day #44 😯
LikeLike
@ Kathy,
So, it’s becoming more and more evident that I’m fighting a losing battle. At least SOMETHING was accomplished by my being on this blog. I’ve got to rethink what I’m doing.. if it’s the way God wants me to be “evangelizing”. So, thanks everyone.. I hope I’ve at least caused you to think about things from a different angle at least. If anyone has any sincere questions, I’ll be glad to answer them/ give my point of view, but I can’t do this circular game playing anymore.. something I’ve probably been guilty of myself a time or two.. it’s just not accomplishing anything positive. And it wastes way too much time. I can’t let the issues that others have, become issues for me.. I’ve got enough of my own to deal with.
I want to commiserate with you for a little bit. You won’t believe me, but I can remember feeling this way and thinking many of the things you’ve expressed about us during my time attempting to evangelize. I’m going to reveal some personal things here now. It was during my attempt to evangelize to an agnostic individual that I began to have doubts. He asked for extra-Biblical proof or evidence of my claims for YEC, Jesus’ resurrection, the flood, etc. I thought ‘no problem’. But it turned out to be a very big problem. I soon learned that much of what I believed about these things was problematic at best. At first I did try to just put it out of my mind and choose to just believe what the Bible said over and above any evidence to the contrary. That proved difficult. You see, I do want to know what’s true. There are many factors that play into why I no longer believe. It isn’t just one thing. It’s not just the martyrs, or just evolution, or just the flood. It’s all of these things and lots more.
But I do remember trying to evangelize to atheists and thinking how arrogant and sad they were. That all they needed to do was humble themselves. That the only reason they didn’t believe was pride, ego, and selfish desires. I was wrong. All I can tell you is that having made the difficult, painful journey of deconversion I can see that. It was/has been a humbling experience.
I feel like I did give God an honest chance. My disbelief is not a judgement on God. How does one judge a being that they don’t think exists? My judgement, based on the available evidence, is about the Bible and it’s claims. Not God. For all I know there may be one. There might be a creator, but based on the evidence available, I don’t think it’s the God of the Bible.
Having said all that I think you might be right. Maybe you do need to re-think this approach. If it is your intent to evangelize questioning people’s character might not be the best way to go about it. As best as I can remember according to the Bible, when Jesus intended to convert he was compassionate and loving. When he used derision and vitriol he had no intention of converting – only condemning. Which brings me to the conclusion that either he was resigned to the fact that not everyone would believe or some people were predestined for unbelief(if there is truth to Christianity) and he didn’t even try to evangelize them.
LikeLike
“ I can’t let the issues that others have, become issues for me.. I’ve got enough of my own to deal with.” – not to mention that report on Hinduism that’s due Saturday —
LikeLike
Ruth, thanks for sharing. 🙂
LikeLike
I think Kathy has made a very real and concerted effort to re-examine herself and her approach to us on this blog … and I think we should honor that and stop with the snide remarks. Just my opinion.
Ruth, thought your comment was very thoughtful and kind. I hope Kathy can see/feel your sincerity.
LikeLike
in a perfect world, we’d all continually be active in self examination. I agree, nan, no need in snide remarks – they only really detract from a constructive discussion. and I’m certainly guilty.
Ruth, thanks for your comment.
to the below, I feel like these were not snide, and they were certainly sincere and on topic and i’d still like them answered if possible:
“1) Do you believe it is more likely or less likely that the disciples were martyred?:”
me: I dont really care, but I think some disciples were martyred. I think some of the martyr stories were embellished, but i still find it moot, as people dying for something only proves that they died for something and is only evidence for their belief in that thing they died for.
belief in a thing does not equal the actuality of that thing. and again, since all religions have martyrs, can you show how christian martyrs are superior to all the others if you’re going to continue and maintain that dying people are good evidence for truth?
“2) Which religion, of the most prominent ones, do you feel has the most compelling evidence to support it’s claimed “truth”/Truth?”
Me: again, what do you mean by truth? We’ve all answered this question, and then you said that you werent asking which was true in it’s claim of divine origins…. so how then and in what way do you mean “true” if not in their claims of being divine?
Additionally, you clearly think Christianity has more credentials for this “truth” you’re looking for. Can you provide evidence for this – evidence that other religions do not also claim to have? then do the same for which version of christianity you think is the right one?
and why limit your request to the “most prominent ones?”
and going back to #1, I can sit here and insist on arguing that buddhist martyrs are superior because they’re better and common sense shows that the factual evidence surrounding their martyrdom is widely accepted, etc, etc…
I can say it over and over and over again. Would that convince you? What if I said you werent being objective? would you agree with me then? What if i said common sense shows that i was right? then? now what if i just repeated that buddhist martyrs were superior?
if that doesnt convince you, why do you think it would work when you do the same thing, except in regard to christians?
I also think Arch’s request for some actual research into Hinduism would be profitable. that way kathy can actually make her case that christianity is better and has more credentials.
LikeLike
Nan, I appreciate your input here. I don’t think it was aimed wholly at me, but I wonder to what extent it was.
I am open to constructive criticism from anyone here, in particular with regard to how I comported myself in my latest comment to Kathy. You can comment here publicly, or “Contact Me” privately through the link on my blog.
LikeLike
I’d also like to comment on this:
“Humility is a Christian REQUIREMENT. It’s a fundamental aspect of Christianity. And the idea of humbling ourselves before God is something that often offends the liberal minded.. it threatens their pride.. it goes against what is controlling them. And it doesn’t seem to matter that Jesus humbled Himself more than any human being could ever possibly do.” – kathy
Humility is a wonderful virtue. You believe in the god of the bible, so it makes sense that you’d humble yourself to his teachings.
I doubt you’d humble yourself to zeus or muhammad, but not out of stubborn rebellion, but out of disbelief.
Similarly, I disbelieve the god of the bible. If jesus really died for anyone, then that is certainly commendable and quite a selfless act. I just do not believe the authors of the bible. men wrote it. men gave it to me. MEN’S CLAIMS are all we have of it.
Some of the big and significant claims were world wide, yet no one else recorded them. In Joshua’s day when the sun stood still for a battle and when the sun moved backward several degrees for Hezekiah are two of several that were not recorded by anyone else.
many cultures were gifted astronomers in those days, who recorded star movements, sun movements, etc – but no one recorded these miraculous events?
These two points alone prove nothing, but it is a glimpse into why I find the enormous and supernatural claims of the bible to be just that – claims.
I’m not trying to arrogantly dismiss god, I am trying to verify that if i worship one, that it’s the right one – just like I used to expect of those who O believed were in the wrong denomination, or in the wrong religion all together. What would make them reconsider the truth of their religion – and would I reconsider my own if found similar things?
I did recionsider and I changed my mind. I think i’m right, but i could be wrong, and so could you. It’s a constant search. I used to pray that i better understood god’s truth and his word… It occurred to me that muslims who doubted islam might pray to better understand allah’s koran and allah’s truth, but that that was a biased and flawed way of looking at it.
…so I began to pray that I find the truth, whatever it looked like, where ever it was, and whether I liked it or not.
LikeLike