And as always, you haven’t addressed the question of how miracles prove anything.
Hundreds of people claim to have been raised from the dead and even though you insist it’s a bad thing, I’m skeptical about the assertion that this proves any of them are the only son of god.
I have though. Miracles are evidence, not proof. Can scientists prove animal life evolved? They have some good evidence, but they can’t prove it. Can you prove Napoleon lived? Well, we have history books and personal testimonies, monuments etc. but these are circumstantial. And the resurrection has the same kind of evidence, circumstantial, testimony and history books.
There is evidence for the resurrection and pretty good evidence, but not proof.
Even skeptics believe Jesus lived and was crucified. The amazing thing is that some very persuasive folks believed he rose from the dead. And they weren’t the gullible type. They did not believe the women’s’ reports, and thought Jesus was a ghost, not a resurrected person when he showed up.
You’d think such an episode would have been hushed up.
But they went on to give their lives for this belief. Again, evidence, not proof.
I think you believe god is everywhere, or in all things. Seems like panpsychism or something near it. Where is your proof for that?.
Not at all.
I’ve said, as Christopher Hitchens did, that for the sake of argument, I’ll put the whole argument in reverse: that is, I’ll grant you that all of the fantastic events surrounding Jesus life actually happened.
The fact is, however, that this still leaves you “with all of your work in front of you” as there is no logical connection between those miraculous events, and any of the other claims about him.
For example, being able to walk on water doesn’t establish the veracity of the statement “the meek shall inherit the earth”.
And changing water into wine doesn’t do anything to disprove Dave Ramsey assertion that “cash is king”.
But most importantly, there is no logical connection between Jesus’ death and resurrection and the claim that all of the sinners in the world can have eternal life just by believing that it happened.
When you understand this basic point, you will also realize that there is no logical way to establish these connections, just as there is no need to make any of the irrational leaps of faith which are the supposedly required as an essential part of organized Christianity.
As to panpsychism’s claim that everything is conscious at some level, you’re right. I have no proof. But there is plenty of evidence and if I were a “proof texter” I could even send you on an Easter egg hunt looking for the obvious clues in the NT.
But I’m sure you’d be hyper-critical about those passages, even though you know super skepticism is a bad thing-in other words, you don’t want to unlearn the idea that the universe is comprised mostly of senseless matter-so I won’t waste my time.
Interesting thoughts. If you grant all the miraculous works, believing that the meek shall inherit the earth, as Jesus the miracle worker said, is not that great a leap of faith. The works give credibility to the teaching.
Why do people like my daughter, follow Ramsey? Well, it is logical, and when put into practice, works, by and large. The success gives credibility.
“Amazing grace, how sweet the sound.” If God is indeed that gracious, to take the punishment for my misdeeds, yet calling me to change my ways, and I believe he actually does forgive, It changes my whole outlook. If God forgives me, I can forgive others. In fact it’s required.
Jesus said, “Come to me all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” I did it, and indeed have rest, my troubled mind is at peace with God, because of what he did.
Of course, I could be deceiving myself. But i live to help others and to give them this peace as well. Forgiveness is a powerful force for good
As far as panpsychism goes. You seem to be making the same leap of faith that you criticize believers for making I am not sure the evidence for panpsychism is that strong. There is a certain sense that all life is lived by faith in one thing or another. Camus said that the only real psychological question is wither to commit suicided or not. He argued against such an act, teaching that we should embrace the absurd. But most are unable to embrace the nihilism he advocated.
I sense panpsychism gives comfort, for God is everywhere. But the forgiveness of Yahweh really makes a difference.
Not necessarily.
E.g., walking on water wouldn’t prove the moon was made of green cheese, right?
IOW, you’re still missing the point.
Funny.
I find very few of your comment peace inducing, and while it’s just my impression, it seems your remarks are intentionally the opposite of that.
And besides, I assume this means you are not a Bible-believing Christian as Jesus said his good news was not meant to make the world a more peaceful place.
Ah, Now I get it. You are saying, even with the miracles, the idea that he is deity doesn’t not follow.
Jesus did claim to be divine.
One of his favorite names was “Son of Man”. Seems like a denial of deity, but it is actually a claim to it. The name comes from Daniel 7:13 where a figure comes before Jehovah and is worshiped in his presence. So, as elsewhere (Mark 2), Jesus claims deity .
Most people who claim to be divine are mentally disturbed. But I do not know any who see Jesus as such an individual. Sniff test, you know.
So, if Jesus claimed to be divine, and you grant all the evidence as Hutchison did then Jesus claim at least has to be taken seriously.
If all matter is suffused with deity, is there really a problem with a man claiming and actually being deity?
Now I am pulling your leg. I think Jesus’ credentials are unique.
As far as your peace goes, I am sorry i have helped destroy it. Jesus was ambiguous about peace. He said he gave it, to his followers, but that he did not come to bring it to the world. He said he brought not peace but a sword. And he did do both things. I would hope you could be on the receiving side of the equation.
Jesus supposedly claimed everyone was divine.
This is the blasphemy for which he was nearly stoned to death.
Further, he was quoting King David when he said it.
He also said rocks could sing.
And if both of those two guys believed the OT, which the legends tell us they did, they also accepted the “fact” that animals could talk, the sun and the sea could react to conscious commands, aliens visit our planet, giants once roamed the earth, etc.
Again, these are just stories.
But you’ve actually touched on some of my “Jesus was a panpsychist” evidence.
Which, at least to my mind, is much easier to believe that the idea that he had to become a zombie to atone for everyone sins.
IOW, and quite ironically, I think I take Jesus’ divinity claims much more seriously than it seems most so-called Christians do and I’m convinced that much religious dogma needs to be unlearned.
But if you think your faith is better, or your interpretation of this evidence is more “truth adjacent” and/or “peace-inducing”, both of us know there’s no way for the other to prove the other wrong based merely on hearsay and conjecture.
This is an interesting post. Stating that you take Jesus’ claims more seriously than most Christians seem a bit of a reach, since you really do not think him divine in any special way, but most Christians have not thought too deeply about it, I imagine.
So, you’re admitting that you, too, are exercising faith? I thought those crazy believers were the benighted ones. I think Jesus did atone for everyone’s sins, and this requires respecting, believing some things that others whom I respect have said
You believe all matter has consciousness, which seems a bit of a leap of faith to me. Yet you so fiercely condemn others for believing something you think is fable, and you believe something that most consider absurd. I have heard of no good defense for that posture, and you have not given one. So why all the ragging on those who believe in Jesus??
Panpsychism is a faith position. Can’t be proven, or even come close to be proven. It is a leap of faith, so perhaps a more sympathetic approach to others wold be better.
A more sympathetic approach to those who say there is only one way to be saved?
Not gonna happen.
And if you’re waiting for me to defend panpsychism, I’d rather do the Christian thing and shake the dust from my Nike’s.
The dust remains on my New Balances.
But if you are unwilling to defend your own faith position, does that not disqualify your from criticizing other people of faith?
Again, you mistate the case.
The point is not that I am unwilling to discuss the issue further.
The point is that you’ve already done what you consider to be enough investigation into the question and have arrived a final conclusion which you stated previously.
And I’m just as certain that any effort to change a mind which is already made up is as pointless as a child’s spherical kickball. After all, it took three tries to get through the point that miracles prove nothing.
(And okay, every ball can be said to have an infinite number of points but if those points are so Infinitely small as to be only imaginary, that’s exactly the same thing as saying that it the ball doesn’t have any real, discernible point.)
In regards to faith, I’d suggest there are degrees of this commodity.
For example, it doesn’t take much to convince me that gravity works 24/7, intelligence is better than ignorance and that it is possible to be still and know that god is everywhere, in every thing, all the time.
On the other hand, in order for me turn my life inside out and accept that zombies are real things, I’m going to need more than a few unfalsifiable scraps of 2,000 year old propaganda.
That said, perhaps will Jesus will one day return and vindicate people’s faith in all the fantastic stories we’ve all heard about him.
But I’m not holding my breath anymore than I assume you are.
This topic was automatically closed after 14 days. New replies are no longer allowed.