My annual Memorial Day thread (3 Viewers)

[MTDB1983]

Marsha... I'm not challenging your beliefs or your faith. In fact I feel that I have very strong evidence and a firm basis for praying.

However, my questions are as pertinent for believers as they are for non-believers. Proof for what you believe is just as important for those who believe as it is for those who deny the existence of a divine being. No one can simply say I believe because I feel strongly about something anymore than a non-believer can say that existence of a divine being is 'impossible' without their having undeniable evidence.

This might sound pedantic, but I mean this honestly, and not as a way to trip anyone up. But where is your evidence that love is real?

 

[MTDB1983]

I am so with you in your sentiments. I cannot believe those innocent children from the OT would be condemned to Hell. That is not a God of love. And my faith clings to the verse where we will see through a glass clearly, in Heaven. I can't believe I responded to this , let alone am reading the thread.

Also, I’m open to any discussion, prayer, verbal hugs lol, that anyone wants to have through private message. I’ll answer anything at any time as best I can and always with love and understanding not with judgment and cruelty.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

I am not talking about prosperity gospel that I am getting a bunch of earthly blessings and this is what I am basing my faith on. The changes in my life were a movement away from self-destructive behavior and selfish living and moving towards Christ. I have gained peace in my life and dependence on God instead of self. I had severe anxiety and depression that has also been relieved in a night and day transformation where medicine was not able to help.

Well I am definitely glad you found peace and would never want to dissuade you from it

 

[flygirl]

Also, I’m open to any discussion, prayer, verbal hugs lol, that anyone wants to have through private message. I’ll answer anything at any time as best I can and always with love and understanding not with judgment and cruelty.

I replied to the wrong person...meant to reply to the poster who said he has a hard time reconciling the God of the OT with the God of the NT. So much cruelty in OT. And what is with the multiple wives of the OT? Don't answer that..not looking for a debate. I see through a glass darkly.

 

[MTDB1983]

Well I am definitely glad you found peace and would never want to dissuade you from it

I know sometimes you are given a hard time on here, but I kind of like you Guido. Especially your random comedic timing. That’s when you’re at your best.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

This might sound pedantic, but I mean this honestly, and not as a way to trip anyone up. But where is your evidence that love is real?

Not pedantic at all and is an excellent question
I have made the same analogy many times (that’s not why it’s excellent, btw)
As I see it spirituality is to religion as live is to relationships
We can’t share/explain what it means to be in love or spirituality connected
But we can share religious practices and relationship advice

 

[MTDB1983]

I replied to the wrong person...meant to reply to the poster who said he has a hard time reconciling the God of the OT with the God of the NT. So much cruelty in OT. And what is with the multiple wives of the OT? Don't answer that..not looking for a debate. I see through a glass darkly.

Which verses are you referring to?

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

I know sometimes you are given a hard time on here, but I kind of like you Guido. Especially your random comedic timing. That’s when you’re at your best.

Appreciate you saying that
I know I dish and ***** a lot and would be quite the fool if I didn’t expect to get at least that much back in response
But again appreciate the kind words

 

[Madmarsha]

I am not talking about prosperity gospel that I am getting a bunch of earthly blessings and this is what I am basing my faith on. The changes in my life were a movement away from self-destructive behavior and selfish living and moving towards Christ. I have gained peace in my life and dependence on God instead of self. I had severe anxiety and depression that has also been relieved in a night and day transformation where medicine was not able to help.

Just to tag on here, everyone these days is, Oh, go get a pill. I just don't believe all of mankind needs pills these days. Look, it's hard but I need to do real work here and a pill can't do it for me.

 

[MTDB1983]

Just to tag on here, everyone these days is, Oh, go get a pill. I just don't believe all of mankind needs pills these days. Look, it's hard but I need to do real work here and a pill can't do it for me.

I spend my life helping keep kids and adults off of drugs, mainly opioids. They are the worst answer to an even worse question.

 

[MTDB1983]

By the way, I might mention that William Albright is an incredibly respected 20th century historian that is secular an on record for saying that the Bible is the most accurate historical document we have. Also, Glueck went on record with the same claim.

One would have to seek out that info if they really wanted to know.

 

[Madmarsha]

I spend my life helping keep kids and adults off of drugs, mainly opioids. They are the worst answer to an even worse question.

Luckily, substance abuse is one problem I don't have.

 

[SystemShock]

A.) Women speaking in church. This won’t be found in the Bible. Remember that much is left out of the Bible by the writers because context was understood at the time. Historical norms didn’t need to be addressed. It would be like me writing you a book about websites and then explaining how to turn on a computer. Point is, much of the context is found from study of the culture.

I knew it was not found in the Bible. So I asked you, who/where are the independent sources (or at least 1) that confirms that women at the church of Corinth were unruly? "Studying the culture" is not an answer. Your analogy doesn't fit.

Read “Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes: Cultural Studies” for more info

By one Reverend Dr. Kenneth E. Bailey, Th. D. If I were looking for confirmation bias, I would, but I am not interested in that.

Scholars widely agree about this verse in Corinthians. Again, you would have to read sources who wrote about the Historical context of the NT.

And yet, the words in the passage have not changed to reflect the alleged context. I am not going to read sources who have a vested interested in apologizing for what the Bible says; it'll be a waste of time.

B.) It’s pretty obvious that when Paul starts out a letter with “To the Church of Corinth”, that he’s talking to the Church of Corinth. 1 Cor- Ch1:V2.

Yes. And?

C.) Paul was trying to maintain order in the Church of Corinth, because they were having issues with the divide among educated and ignorant members. Again, agreed upon by sources outside the Bible; scholars who study the Historical context.

Again, who are these sources?

In Ch. 11 Paul illustrates that women are absolutely allowed to speak, as he mentions them prophesying and praying in church meetings.

I am going to guess that you are referring to Corinthians 11:5, which says:

5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved.

I don't see anything about church meetings. Only things about a woman's hair. On a side note, just 2 verses above... are you sure you want to continue with Corinthians?

And to your last question about when God is speaking to modern people, or the time period mentioned, it’s all about the Context. It is always revealed who God is talking to when you read the Context.

That is really convenient. I mean, I can read things and put my own convenient context to them.

Again, we will have to butt heads here. Name a more validated book in Ancient history than the Bible. Let’s address this one so we don’t have to write long drawn out posts with multiple points to address.

Sure, we can address that one. The Bible is NOT the most validated book in Ancient history. Not even close. It may be the most validated in the eyes of the faithful, but in reality, it isn't. I'll venture to say, it is probably the most debunked book in history.

As far as my 15 year comment, absolutely I misspoke. It’s 25-30 years. Which is remarkably recent when dealing with biographical historical information. See, many many people that lived during the time of Jesus were still alive when the Gospels were written, including John himself and James. In Ancient Literature that means something. It means a lot actually. Shoot we could take your 30-40 year estimation and that is still unparalleled in the context of Ancient Lit. And if you don’t know how the Bible is the most validated book that we have from Ancient Lit, you aren’t talking to the right people.

25-30 years is a long time to account for a person of event through word of mouth, in any age, and especially where there is a vested interest in the story conveying the desired message. In the case of Jesus, there are no written accounts of him during the time he allegedly lived, which is surprising considering all the miracles he performed - according to John, the world couldn't contain all the books written about his miracles; I'll concede there may be "some" hyperbole in that statement, but there isn't even one book written during the time Jesus allegedly lived about his alleged miracles. Most Christians point to Josephus as an independent source, but he was born 30-some years after Jesus allegedly died.

The only remarkable thing that I see, is that it took that long to write about Jesus. Most of the people and events we know, it is because people wrote about them when the person was alive, or when the events were happening (or right after).

By the way, I might mention that William Albright is an incredibly respected 20th century historian that is secular an on record for saying that the Bible is the most accurate historical document we have.

Also, Glueck went on record with the same claim.

William Foxwell Albright, born to Methodist missionaries in Chile, biblical archaeologist and scholar, who pushed the idea that the ultimate goal of the biblical archaeologist is to prove the Bible? The one that continues to be questioned as time goes by, by Israeli archaeologists of all people? That "secular" William Albright?

And Rabbi Nelson Glueck?

 

[MTDB1983]

I knew it was not found in the Bible. So I asked you, who/where are the independent sources (or at least 1) that confirms that women at the church of Corinth were unruly? "Studying the culture" is not an answer. Your analogy doesn't fit.


By one Reverend Dr. Kenneth E. Bailey, Th. D. If I were looking for confirmation bias, I would, but I am not interested in that.


And yet, the words in the passage have not changed to reflect the alleged context. I am not going to read sources who have a vested interested in apologizing for what the Bible says; it'll be a waste of time.


Yes. And?


Again, who are these sources?


I am going to guess that you are referring to Corinthians 11:5, which says:

5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved.

I don't see anything about church meetings. Only things about a woman's hair. On a side note, just 2 verses above... are you sure you want to continue with Corinthians?


That is really convenient. I mean, I can read things and put my own convenient context to them.


Sure, we can address that one. The Bible is NOT the most validated book in Ancient history. Not even close. It may be the most validated in the eyes of the faithful, but in reality, it isn't. I'll venture to say, it is probably the most debunked book in history.


25-30 years is a long time to account for a person of event through word of mouth, in any age, and especially where there is a vested interest in the story conveying the desired message. In the case of Jesus, there are no written accounts of him during the time he allegedly lived, which is surprising considering all the miracles he performed - according to John, the world couldn't contain all the books written about his miracles; I'll concede there may be "some" hyperbole in that statement, but there isn't even one book written during the time Jesus allegedly lived about his alleged miracles. Most Christians point to Josephus as an independent source, but he was born 30-some years after Jesus allegedly died.

The only remarkable thing that I see, is that it took that long to write about Jesus. Most of the people and events we know, it is because people wrote about them when the person was alive, or when the events were happening (or right after).


William Foxwell Albright, born to Methodist missionaries in Chile, biblical archaeologist and scholar, who pushed the idea that the ultimate goal of the biblical archaeologist is to prove the Bible? The one that continues to be questioned as time goes by, by Israeli archaeologists of all people? That "secular" William Albright?

And Rabbi Nelson Glueck?

Whew. Boy. I don’t know what else to tell you. If sources are archaeological then they must be apologizing for the Bible. But your sources are valid?

There is simply too much you have written to address it all. I had to back out of a convo with Oye for the same reason. Face to face discussion takes 5-10 mins. To sit and write it all on a cell phone takes time I don’t have.

But, I can address a few points. First off, Jesus’s life wasn’t chronicled during the time of His life because doing so would have made you a target for legitimizing him. It was punishable by death to even follow him at points throughout his life, and many Christians after that were violently murdered and tortured for being Christians. It wasn’t as simple as writing about Him in the modern sense. One has to wrap one’s head around the context of the time.

Secondly, Josephus wasn’t the only Historian. There were 3 more. Look them up. I’m asking you to so you’ll read the 1,000 answers to the 1,000 questions you’ll ask me if I were to give you their names.

Thirdly, you made a comment about 30 years being too long to biograph someone based on word of mouth. Sure, in the modern time we live, but in a culture where oral tradition was so deeply ingrained in the fabric of people, 30 years wasn’t long at all. When children were growing up during this time, it was a widely practiced act to rehearse stories that were told to them thousands of time so that when they recommunicated them, they were meticulously accurate. In addition, James and John were both in Jesus’ inner circle. Their words weren’t taken from word of mouth. Matthew was an apostle of Jesus. Mark was a companion of St. Peter. Every single author in the New Testament outside of Paul was alive during Jesus’s life.

Lastly, as I alluded to before, when the Gospels were written, many thousands of people that lived and saw the events that took place were still alive. And yet there weren’t troves of people coming forward to disprove what had been written. Jesus was kind of an important figure. If his biographer had penned falsehoods, there would have been major pushback, just as their would be today. Back then there weren’t millions of books about millions of people.

There are literally thousands of historians that don’t dispute whether Jesus was real, the dispute was whether or not Jesus was miraculous.

Who burned Rome and why? How did Josephus escape and what did he escape from? There are thousands of historical pieces of evidence mocking Jesus and his followers. Hundreds of Christians were slain for being Christians. Google it and a quick search will show you.

But at the end of the day, this is why Faith is a requirement. Because no amount of proof I could give you would be sufficient. None at all. So really I just respond because I enjoy the subject. But in my heart of hearts I know that not a single solitary thing I could say or piece of evidence I could give you would change your mind. And that’s ok.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Whew. Boy. I don’t know what else to tell you. If sources are archaeological then they must be apologizing for the Bible. But your sources are valid?

There is simply too much you have written to address it all. I had to back out of a convo with Oye for the same reason. Face to face discussion takes 5-10 mins. To sit and write it all on a cell phone takes time I don’t have.

But, I can address a few points. First off, Jesus’s life wasn’t chronicled during the time of His life because doing so would have made you a target for legitimizing him. It was punishable by death to even follow him at points throughout his life, and many Christians after that were violently murdered and tortured for being Christians. It wasn’t as simple as writing about Him in the modern sense. One has to wrap one’s head around the context of the time.

Secondly, Josephus wasn’t the only Historian. There were 3 more. Look them up. I’m asking you to so you’ll read the 1,000 answers to the 1,000 questions you’ll ask me if I were to give you their names.

Thirdly, you made a comment about 30 years being too long to biograph someone based on word of mouth. Sure, in the modern time we live, but in a culture where oral tradition was so deeply ingrained in the fabric of people, 30 years wasn’t long at all. When children were growing up during this time, it was a widely practiced act to rehearse stories that were told to them thousands of time so that when they recommunicated them, they were meticulously accurate. In addition, James and John were both in Jesus’ inner circle. Their words weren’t taken from word of mouth. Matthew was an apostle of Jesus. Mark was a companion of St. Peter.

Lastly, as I alluded to before, when the Gospels were written, many thousands of people that lived and saw the events that took place were still alive. And yet there weren’t troves of people coming forward to disprove what had been written. Jesus was kind of an important figure. If his biographer had penned falsehoods, there would have been major pushback, just as their would be today. Back then there weren’t millions of books about millions of people.

But at the end of the day, this is why Faith is a requirement. Because no amount of proof I could give you would be sufficient. None at all. So really I just respond because I enjoy the subject. But in my heart of hearts I know that not a single solitary thing I could say or piece of evidence I could give you would change your mind. And that’s ok.

Out of curiosity, what is your take on the Gnostic Gospels?