Should the Christian faith be rationally defended?

by Narkissos 61 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  garybuss

  Nark, You wrote:

  Whatever, it sounds amazing to me that you refer to "the duties of the messiah" as if such a thing could be objectively found in the "Hebrew Bible".

  Now you are on my page. When I did my research in the middle 1990's I saw no reason to research Christianity in depth. I understand that Christianity, or rather "New Testament" writings were based on the Hebrew Bible. My interest is not so much in the evolution of the religions based on the writings as in the writings themselves.
  
  The church down the road from my home says the Bible (actually two bibles bound together) is the divinely inspired, infallible, inerrant word of God. I decided to see if I could support that or not. I also decided I could skip the Greek Bible and verify if the Hebrew Bible was in fact inerrant. I found it to be error riddled and at best supported by superstition and tradition.
  
  There is no point in looking at Christianity that bases it's thesis on a book that is not reliable. I agree that the duties of the Messiah can not be objectively found in the Hebrew Bible and neither can anything else that would support Christianity that I can see because the work is suspect.
  
  For a true believer, no proof is needed, for a skeptic, no proof is sufficient. Thanks for your comments. I have enjoyed reading them.
  
  
  
  
• 

  czarofmischief

  For a true believer, no proof is needed, for a skeptic, no proof is sufficient. Thanks for your comments. I have enjoyed reading them.

  Then I suppose that I am not a true believer... although perhaps my "proof" would be insufficient for you.

  I myself suppose that I am not a Christian, per se - the Bible is a useful book, full of rich metaphor, interesting intellectual exercises, profound moral truths. But if every "historical" event in it were disproved tomorrow I would not feel the need to throw it away; I think that my faith is different from that.

  But do I believe that Christ lived, died, and lived again? Yes, I think it likely. That is a reassuring thought for ME. It's the most important thing in the Bible, for me. It gives me perspective on everything else. Have I had the "meeting" with him that so many others have had? No. Nor would I know how I would react if I did. The encounter might get violent as I dispute with him over his long absence.

  Nor do I insist that all believe as I do; although once on this board it was described as a "useful kit of survival tools" that has sustained me though much. Even a mirage can serve a purpose by providing hope to those lost in the desert. Of course, the disappointment if it really IS a mirage might be overwhelming. However, I think that it is not. Because nothing is being asked of me save what I know I should be doing already: surviving (easier now than it has been), being a good husband, neighbor and father (soon). No special effort, no preaching, no evangelism, no holier-than-thou charity (although I have a couple I send a few bucks to when I can), nothing, really, except what I really want to be anyway.

  If God made man in his image, and man has ten fingers and two hands to do things with, then mayhap religion and enlightened humanism are but two different fingers on different hands being used to accomplish a great and harmonious work?

  CZAR