It is safe to say that almost all, (if not all) humans lie at one time or another. In other words, lying is very common. That being said, which is more likely, Jesus walked on water or someone told a lie? Jesus was born of a virgin, or some one lied? God spoke as a burning bush, or some one lied? Unless you are lying to yourself, you would have to admit that it is much more likely that the above examples are lies than actual events.
18 Oct 14
Originally posted by 667joeOr it was a mistranslation.
Jesus was born of a virgin, or some one lied?
Also, a lot of the other events mentioned are not what one would typically call lies, but rather theological /mythological / story telling inventions. I rather doubt that the writers saw themselves as liars, and did not expect their readers to take everything literally.
18 Oct 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadI think that that is a key point. There was a writer called Henry Treece who used to write novelizations of ancient myths. In the introduction to one of his books he gave a comparison of writing in a realist and a poetic style. He wrote a realist description of an old man sitting at a table in a tavern and scratching his fingernails across the surface of the table. Then he wrote the same thing in a poetic style - it was twice as long and there is a conversation between the man and the table. They both describe the same thing, but he was able to get more into the poetic version - he could make a universal point about ageing (I think it's ages since I read the book). By the same token, was St. Paul really blinded on the road to Damascus or is it that revelation is (like) a blinding light?
Or it was a mistranslation.
Also, a lot of the other events mentioned are not what one would typically call lies, but rather theological /mythological / story telling inventions. I rather doubt that the writers saw themselves as liars, and did not expect their readers to take everything literally.
18 Oct 14
Originally posted by 667joeI am not a Christian and I do not believe any miracles took place. I am actually skeptical of almost all the contents of the New Testament including the actual existence of Jesus.
Are you admitting then that Christian Theology is based on untruths what ever you wish to call them?
There can be little doubt that the gospel accounts of Jesus' early life was concocted by the Gospel writers or their source in order to make a theological point/claim. For example they needed him to be born in Bethlehem so they made up the census. But I am not convinced that such story telling to fit a theological point is equivalent to a lie.
Similarly, there are a number of differences between the gospel accounts which tell us a lot about the theology of the writers and who their intended audience was. I know this from Christians who recognize those differences and recognize that some of the contents of the gospels were less than factual and served a theological purpose for the writer. But they are still Christian and do not consider the Gospels to be books full of lies.
Originally posted by 667joeIf there was just one person saying something happened that seems impossible then it is obviously more likely to be untrue. However, when several people recount the same unusual happenings the likelihood that it is the truth increases. That is why it is necessary to consider all the evidence, even the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo.
It is safe to say that almost all, (if not all) humans lie at one time or another. In other words, lying is very common. That being said, which is more likely, Jesus walked on water or someone told a lie? Jesus was born of a virgin, or some one lied? God spoke as a burning bush, or some one lied? Unless you are lying to yourself, you would have to admit that it is much more likely that the above examples are lies than actual events.
https://www.shroud.com/guscin.htm
18 Oct 14
Originally posted by 667joeI don't think it is as black and white as that. For instance Jesus
It is safe to say that almost all, (if not all) humans lie at one time or another. In other words, lying is very common. That being said, which is more likely, Jesus walked on water or someone told a lie? Jesus was born of a virgin, or some one lied? God spoke as a burning bush, or some one lied? Unless you are lying to yourself, you would have to admit that it is much more likely that the above examples are lies than actual events.
may have walked across some dangerous mud-flats - a story
worth relating, but then it became exaggerated.
The Virgin birth is not a lie as such - people of the time believed it;
it was fulfilling prophecy and fitting in with many other religions
which had saviours born to a virgin.
19 Oct 14
Originally posted by wolfgang59... Which turned out pretty well for Mary - saved her a stoning, scored her some gold. Not at all suspicious.
I don't think it is as black and white as that. For instance Jesus
may have walked across some dangerous mud-flats - a story
worth relating, but then it became exaggerated.
The Virgin birth is not a lie as such - people of the time believed it;
it was fulfilling prophecy and fitting in with many other religions
which had saviours born to a virgin.
19 Oct 14
Originally posted by avalanchethecatI think you are confused about the order of events. The story about Mary conceiving was written about a century after Jesus' birth. The later interpretation of that story in which Mary was a virgin, came even later. It would not have helped Mary.
... Which turned out pretty well for Mary - saved her a stoning, scored her some gold. Not at all suspicious.
19 Oct 14
Originally posted by RJHindsThat depends on what basis they are recounting it. If many people recount an event based on a single source then it does not increase the likelihood of the events having taken place. In the case of the Bible, not one single writer was an actual eye witness to any of the events surrounding Jesus. Not one of the writers ever met Jesus in person.
However, when several people recount the same unusual happenings the likelihood that it is the truth increases.
Originally posted by 667joeWhat is more likely? Did man simply evolove from amino acids to produce life devoid of intelligent intervention, even though scientists have never observed this happening in nature nor can they duplicate it in a lab?
It is safe to say that almost all, (if not all) humans lie at one time or another. In other words, lying is very common. That being said, which is more likely, Jesus walked on water or someone told a lie? Jesus was born of a virgin, or some one lied? God spoke as a burning bush, or some one lied? Unless you are lying to yourself, you would have to admit that it is much more likely that the above examples are lies than actual events.
What is more likely, the Bible is a book of lies or there is something there that should be shown respect since pretty much al world religions point to it as a book of truth and the vast majority of people think it is the inspired word of God?
19 Oct 14
Originally posted by whodeyNo true Scotsman would disagree with you.
What is more likely? Did man simply evolove from amino acids to produce life devoid of intelligent intervention, even though scientists have never observed this happening in nature nor can they duplicate it in a lab?
What is more likely, the Bible is a book of lies or there is something there that should be shown respect since pretty much al world religio ...[text shortened]... t to it as a book of truth and the vast majority of people think it is the inspired word of God?
19 Oct 14
Originally posted by 667joeWell of course we are constructed with amino acids. No one is denying that. The question is, how?
How did god get here? The amino acid evolution route is more likely than the god route! The Origin Of the Species is far more trustworthy than the Bible.
You have no answer.