Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Proof

@fmf said
They wrote the NT decades and decades after Jesus is thought to have lived. Paul didn't even meet Jesus and yet wrote a huge chunk of the NT. The Book of Revelation, as a supposed part of the history of Jesus, is just taking the mickey. The NT is the "written record" of what they produced.

So when one does not have faith in the heart and mind such as yourself and finds fault in the bible and has no concept of who was behind the making and authorship of the Bible, who is Jehovah, then there can be no understanding of the bible.
The faith that one has to have in recognizing that Jehovah has used humans to pin what he tells them no matter who he picked throughout the history of the bible to it's completion, is obviously missing by ones like yourself. If Jehovah had chosen someone with an IQ of ten and could hardly hold a pin, it would still have been done exactly as he wanted it to be done word by word because of his spirit influencing that person to write exactly what he wanted them to write.
So knowing that Jehovah can do whatever he wants it doesn't matter the challenges that we may see as humans that may appear. Time also is no issue with him just as you seem to think there is with Paul doing his writing after Jesus died.

@sonship said
If the "cult personality" Christians wanted to firmly establish that Jesus was the faithful Son of God. WHY would they include that on the cross He cried out -

My God, my God, Why have you forsaken Me ?

Wouldn't that be counter productive to imply that Jesus thought Himself to have been forsaken by the God Whom He lived to serve ?

No. There's nothing amiss about it. It's just the narrative detail of the religious literature and doctrine they concocted. There's nothing "counterproductive" about it. It's just the content of the cult of personality's dogma and mythology.

@galveston75 said
So when one does not have faith in the heart and mind such as yourself and finds fault in the bible and has no concept of who was behind the making and authorship of the Bible, who is Jehovah, then there can be no understanding of the bible.
The faith that one has to have in recognizing that Jehovah has used humans to pin what he tells them no matter who he picked throu ...[text shortened]... s no issue with him just as you seem to think there is with Paul doing his writing after Jesus died.

Well, I am not a Christian so all this stuff you have typed doesn't work on me and it doesn't really address my perspective. I'd be saying more or less the same to you if you were a Muslim or a Hindu.

@galveston75 said
So when one does not have faith in the heart and mind such as yourself and finds fault in the bible and has no concept of who was behind the making and authorship of the Bible, who is Jehovah, then there can be no understanding of the bible.
The faith that one has to have in recognizing that Jehovah has used humans to pin what he tells them no matter who he picked throu ...[text shortened]... s no issue with him just as you seem to think there is with Paul doing his writing after Jesus died.

What is the written record supporting the veracity of the Book of Revelation or even verifying its authorship or a list of all the people [who weren't the person who had the dream/vision] who edited it or added to it?

@galveston75 said
So when one does not have faith in the heart and mind such as yourself and finds fault in the bible and has no concept of who was behind the making and authorship of the Bible, who is Jehovah, then there can be no understanding of the bible.

Not so. Anyone can study the Bible and understand what it says. That's what theology is about. It's just literature. It can be studied. What it says can be understood. The various interpretations of its content can be studied.

This study can be conducted by people who are superstitious and not superstitious alike.

But for me, I just don't believe the claims that Christians make about themselves and about the identity and significance of Jesus ~ claims which they base on the Bible.

I see it as a mixture of folklore, mythology, and doctrines drawn up quite deliberately by people creating a 'new' religion.

@fmf said
They wrote the NT decades and decades after Jesus is thought to have lived. Paul didn't even meet Jesus and yet wrote a huge chunk of the NT. The Book of Revelation, as a supposed part of the history of Jesus, is just taking the mickey. The NT is the "written record" of what they produced.

You still have not answered my question. Here it is again... "Could you show those written records of those "some people" who made up this person that we call Jesus?"
So did you just make this up?

@galveston75 said
Could you show those written records of those "some people" who made up this person that we call Jesus?"

The written record of what they made up about Jesus in the decades after his death is the New Testament. It's latched onto the Old Testament.

@galveston75 said
So did you just make this up?

My perspective is the product of about 25 adult years of being a believer and about 15 years of being an ex-believer. It's not a perspective I have "just" arrived at.

@caissad4 said
Three weeks and still no extraordinary proof for the extraordinary claim of existence of a god or gods. Heck, not even ordinary proof, lol.

So?

A lack of proof does not disclaim.

It's just a lack of proof. Free will is maintained. Hallelujah.

@suzianne said
So?

A lack of proof does not disclaim.

It's just a lack of proof. Free will is maintained. Hallelujah.

Why would a creator being leave such a lack of proof in the veracity of Christianity that only 1 in 3 people in the world subscribe to it - at best? There could be more convincing evidence and a more credible revelation and people would still have the free will to believe something else, surely?

@fmf said
Why would a creator being leave such a lack of proof in the veracity of Christianity that only 1 in 3 people in the world subscribe to it - at best? There could be more convincing evidence and a more credible revelation and people would still have the free will to believe something else, surely?

It is not His will to 'convince'. Or to 'coerce'. Or to 'extort'.

He's made His revelation. The rest, to believe it or not to believe it, is 'on us'.

I've already explained my belief of the role and necessity of free will several times in this forum.

Surely, you already know my answer. Nothing's changed from all the other times I've expounded on it.

@suzianne said
It is not His will to 'convince'. Or to 'coerce'. Or to 'extort'.

I didn't use the words coerce or extort. You have introduced those words into our conversation, not me. How would a more convincing revelation that embraced more human beings and inspired more people to live the Christian life - and gain from its communal and personal benefits - be an abrogation of "free will".

@suzianne said
It is not His will to 'convince'. Or to 'coerce'. Or to 'extort'.

Most Christians purport to believe in torment in burning flames. I think they believe in that kind of "coercion". How do you think the 'threats of eternal torment' ideology relates to 'free will' ideology?

@suzianne said
So?

A lack of proof does not disclaim.

It's just a lack of proof. Free will is maintained. Hallelujah.

Two thousand years and absolutely no proof of the existence of your god.
Unless you count the toast.
Is he on an extended vacation ?

@fmf said
Well, I am not a Christian so all this stuff you have typed doesn't work on me and it doesn't really address my perspective. I'd be saying more or less the same to you if you were a Muslim or a Hindu.

I didn't expect it to.....