26 Apr 17
Originally posted by 667joeMiracles, signs and wonders follow those that believe, they do not lead the way.
“. . . The Christian religion not only was at first attended with miracles, but even at this day cannot be believed by any reasonable person without one.”
—David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, 1748
Originally posted by leunammiAnd do you have autobiographical stories about miracles that followed you ~ as a result of you being among "those that believe" ~ that you believe proves your assertion true?
Miracles, signs and wonders follow those that believe, they do not lead the way.
26 Apr 17
Originally posted by 667joe"Christianity is almost 2,000 years old. We're past the age of prophets... 'proof' is for wimps. Faith in Truth is Knowledge." -- Suzianne, 2016
“. . . The Christian religion not only was at first attended with miracles, but even at this day cannot be believed by any reasonable person without one.”
—David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, 1748
Originally posted by SuzianneOuch, that's bad logic. Let's extrapolate the idea that proof is for wimps and that true knowledge comes from faith.
"Christianity is almost 2,000 years old. We're past the age of prophets... 'proof' is for wimps. Faith in Truth is Knowledge." -- Suzianne, 2016
Two builders look to erect a house on a piece of land. Both are unsure about the nature of the land and if it would support the weight of a house. Builder A arranges surveys to be done of the land to 'prove' that the house's foundations would be secure. Builder B doesn't bother with such land surveys. Proof is for wimps. Instead he just goes straight ahead and builds his house in the 'faith' that it will stand strong.
Which of these builders has acquired true knowledge?
Ghost 2017
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeNeither. In order for their knowledge to be true it would of necessity need to be subject to falsification. In order for their theories to be found true and for them to claim the accolade of true knowledge the houses would need to be built and tested by natural elements. Builder A with his geological data may build his house on solid foundations but due to unforeseen circumstances suffers flooding due to building on a flood plane while builder B simply flukes it and builds on solid granite. Neither of them has gained true knowledge but suffer 'the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.'
Ouch, that's bad logic. Let's extrapolate the idea that proof is for wimps and that true knowledge comes from faith.
Two builders look to erect a house on a piece of land. Both are unsure about the nature of the land and if it would support the weight of a house. Builder A arranges surveys to be done of the land to 'prove' that the house's foundat ...[text shortened]... that it will stand strong.
Which of these builders has acquired true knowledge?
Ghost 2017
'Wisdom is PROVED righteous by its works' - Luke 7:35
Robbie 2017 waz here today and gone tomorrow.
Seeing that we are on a building theme I would also like to point out the miracles in connection with the infant Christian congregation were only intended to be temporary, like scaffolding upon a building which is removed when the structure is finished and functional. Even those performed by the Christ were of a temporary nature.
Love never fails. But if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away with; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away with. For we have partial knowledge and we prophesy partially, but when what is complete comes, what is partial will be done away with - 1 Corinthians 13:8-11