Why believe the bible? (page 4)

tec

im not going to argue the definition of miracle, but i will just note there may be a natural cause for the big bang in an as of yet undiscovered set of natural laws.

This could apply to any of the other miracles, you know.

Just to note... I only just recently got a Quran, and I am just starting to look at it. As far as I am concerned, Allah is the same God... just according to a different people and their understanding - although showing mercy and God favoring the merciful seems to be quite prevalent, at least in the beginning of the Quran, which is as far as I have read.

There is no reason to think that there have not been prophets or miracles or teachings from God sent to other people as well - but that is between them and God. Just look at the spirit of peace that allowed all those Muslims to stand as a human shield around their Christian neighbors... and after reading the first bit of the Quran, I can understand how there absolutely can be peaceful Muslims.

But I have Christ. And even Muslims respect Him and consider Him a prophet with a miraculous conception and everything; just not as the literal son of God.

Tammy

bohm

tec: This is why i prefer just to use events, rather than destinguish between miracles and natural events.

a miracle is a very, very unlikely event, which require some evidence before i will accept it happened, and in that case one has to consider if God or some other unknown natural principle was behind the event.

cyberjesus

An example: the ressuerection

i know about that one...since i was 13

DagothUr

There is no God. So, the Bible is not his word. And even if God exists, he would not transmit his word through a collection of obscure texts.

DanaBug

And even if God exists, he would not transmit his word through a collection of obscure texts.

This is what I think too. I don't think the Bible was inspired, I think it's ancient man's understanding of the way things worked. The creation account told me that. It's exactly parallel to the Babylonian account of creation. If it's inspired, wouldn't it be clearer? Wouldn't there be less room for different interpretations, since it's a matter of life and death?

There are some very good things we can learn from the Bible, especially what Jesus taught. But alot of other religions teach the same thing. H.H. the Dalai Lama says a lot of the same things and they come across as a lot more relevant to me. Personally, I don't see any reason to believe the Bible as opposed to any other religious text. Certainly, we can learn something from all of them. But when it comes down to it, I think they're all the same: someone's/a culture's answer to the questions that we all ask.

PSacramento

...im not going to argue the definition of miracle, but i will just note there may be a natural cause for the big bang in an as of yet undiscovered set of natural laws. so it may have been a true "miracle", requiering a god, or just an everyday natural event: we just dont know.

at any rate: If one accept the big bang and the measurements that lead the conclusion the big bang occured, one must also consider the same type of evidence point to the big rip, ie the complete destruction of the universe and everything we know in it - which is somewhat harder to explain from a christian theological POW, i believe. anyway, i digress, its not evidence that favor the bible over the queraan or thorah at any rate.

I appreciate your faith in science :)

if you by evidence mean eye-witness accounts only recorded in the bible which was written down long after the fact by people who were allready "christians" (or proto-christians), is that evidence then really stronger than that of the miracles the prophet muhammed has said to have carried out?

if you do not want to consider the question because it has to do with the queraan, then consider this: would such evidence (eye witness/second hand testimony by believers written down long after the fact) consider as sufficient evidence in general?

There are a few books on the subject and this gentlemen is probably the leading experts in the subject:

Dr. Gary R. Habermas - Online Resource for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ

bohm

ps:

I appreciate your faith in science :)

thanks!

as for this guy, he come across like a gasbag who like to talk about things he dont understand. For example we have hoyles fallacy:

a. Numerous scientific efforts involving probability theory have revealed that it is extremely improbable that chance could produce even the first complete set of genes and the proteins needed for minimal life. Coppedge found that even after making several concessions to chance the probability of a random sequence yielding just one gene or protein is 10 [to the power] 236. [footnote]12 Calculations by other scientists, even from a naturalistic, evolutionary perspective, similarly reveal that there is only an infinitesimal chance for such a beginning for life. The naturalistic physicist Guye spoke of a probability of 2.02 x 10 [to the power] 231 for chance dissymetry in an extremely simple protein.13 Salisbury suggested a probability of 10 [to the power] 415 for mutations accounting for a new enzyme.14 Yale biophysicist Morowitz calculated a probability of 1 chance in 10 [to the power] 339,999,866 for the chance formation of the correct bond energies for a minimal cell.15 Quastler postulated two extreme limits of the improbability of life occurring by chance. The smaller figure was 1 in 10 [to the power] 255 while the larger extreme was approximately 1 in 10 to the three trillionth power (13 digits).16

and by skimming his articles it seem the holy spirit is cited as a witness.. im not going to read the whole thing, are there some specific account outside the bible which he cite?

PSacramento

Bohm, did you actually READ the website or skim it and lock onto the first thing you thought would discredit this person ?

bohm

PS: well, what i usually do with these kind of websites that are recommended is that i begin to skim them untill i either find something substantial to read, or i find something that is completely wrong. In order i found this:

CS Lewis is not a satanist (true)
Davinci Code is wrong (true)
Hoyles Fallacy (wrong)

the whole site layout piss me off so i thought it would be better to ask for something substantive on the side which is about the topic at hand.

PSacramento

PS: well, what i usually do with these kind of websites that are recommended is that i begin to skim them untill i either find something substantial to read, or i find something that is completely wrong.

Sucks to admit it, but I do the samething too, LOL !!

Why believe the bible?

Share this