Revelation

J

Joeman

Eviiiiiiiil Clown
Registered Senior Member
Christian theology is a revealed theology – God has decided to reveal himself to humans through the "sacred writings".

Revelation, however, can only be meaningful if it is direct through the first person. Revelation through 2nd and 3rd hand sources is not revelation but hearsay. If a strange woman says to me that she got impregnated by the Holy Ghost and gave birth to something that looks like a baby Jesus, unless I know her really well and really trust her, I have no reason to believe her story without direct ocular confirmation. Most people would dismiss her story right away without consideration and even call her a lunatic. The only way I can believe her story without prove is if I really trust her in a way that I am 100% sure she would not tell me lies. Since I don’t know this strange woman at all, like most people, I cannot just take her word for it without prove. For the very same reason, I am not obligated to believe in the fantastic story of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John without direct first hand confirmation. It is even more absurd that, as Christians claim, those who don’t believe in their fabulous stories will suffer eternal torture in hell. Whether the story is actually true or not is not relevant to the discussion. The point is about the incumbency to believe. If people cannot and should not require hard evidence in order to believe, then anyone can make anybody to believe in anything.

For example, someone could say “instead of believing in God, you should believe in Fog who is the creator of God. If you believe, your reward is 1000 fold. If you don’t, you will suffer unimaginable pain for all eternity, but of course, none of this can be proven. You just need to have faith.”
 
Joeman said:
Christian theology is a revealed theology – God has decided to reveal himself to humans through the "sacred writings".

Revelation, however, can only be meaningful if it is direct through the first person. Revelation through 2nd and 3rd hand sources is not revelation but hearsay. If a strange woman says to me that she got impregnated by the Holy Ghost and gave birth to something that looks like a baby Jesus, unless I know her really well and really trust her, I have no reason to believe her story without direct ocular confirmation. Most people would dismiss her story right away without consideration and even call her a lunatic. The only way I can believe her story without prove is if I really trust her in a way that I am 100% sure she would not tell me lies. Since I don’t know this strange woman at all, like most people, I cannot just take her word for it without prove. For the very same reason, I am not obligated to believe in the fantastic story of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John without direct first hand confirmation. It is even more absurd that, as Christians claim, those who don’t believe in their fabulous stories will suffer eternal torture in hell. Whether the story is actually true or not is not relevant to the discussion. The point is about the incumbency to believe. If people cannot and should not require hard evidence in order to believe, then anyone can make anybody to believe in anything.

For example, someone could say “instead of believing in God, you should believe in Fog who is the creator of God. If you believe, your reward is 1000 fold. If you don’t, you will suffer unimaginable pain for all eternity, but of course, none of this can be proven. You just need to have faith.”
Click to expand...

The bible quotes Jesus as saying “they will look but not see, listen but not hear, for god has sealed their ears and eyes”.

And this is the paradox. For those that “see” will believe through instinct and those that cannot “see” will never believe even if they have the proof that they seek. For they cannot comprehend the kingdom of heaven.
 
Light Travelling said:
The bible quotes Jesus as saying “they will look but not see, listen but not hear, for god has sealed their ears and eyes”.

And this is the paradox. For those that “see” will believe through instinct and those that cannot “see” will never believe even if they have the proof that they seek. For they cannot comprehend the kingdom of heaven.
Click to expand...
is'nt that just a case of the emperors new clothes.
it is only a paradox to those who can see the emperors new clothes, those that see the reality do not find it a paradox, why would they.
and also if they had the proof they seek they would be able to see, but the ones who are not seeking to become delusional wont, you cannot see that which is'nt there.

the king is in the alltogether, hes alltogether, alltogether,and alltogether as naked as the day that he was born.
 
Light Travelling said:
The bible quotes Jesus as saying “they will look but not see, listen but not hear, for god has sealed their ears and eyes”.

And this is the paradox. For those that “see” will believe through instinct and those that cannot “see” will never believe even if they have the proof that they seek. For they cannot comprehend the kingdom of heaven.
Click to expand...

Millions of people used their instinct and ended up choosing hundreds of different religions. Instinct has no bearing on a truthfulness of a religion.
 
Light Travelling: The bible quotes Jesus as saying “they will look but not see, listen but not hear, for god has sealed their ears and eyes”.
*************
M*W: NOTHING in the entire bible quotes Jesus directly! The first gospel, Mark, was written circa 70 AD, some 40 years after Jesus' time. The gospel writers, whomever they were, never knew Jesus. They new Paul. The Pauline Epistles were written around 50-63 AD. The epistles were copied by the gospel writers, so Paul greatly influenced the gospels. Paul, BTW, never knew Jesus at all! Paul invented Christianity based on these mythologies. Paul was already dead when the gospels were being written, but his epistles were the groundwork for the gospel writers. The bible is nothing more than ancient creative writing. None of the stories actually happened. Paul based his writings on pagan mysteries. It's all lies. All of it.
 
Med woman,

As neither you or I weren't there physically, I wonder if there were scrolls of Jesus words and events along with other writings and these scrolls were compiled and rewritten by Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John... If this were the case, then it wouldn't be to hard to compile his words some 40 years later.

Lets say I wrote a whole journal of my life and put it in a cave and 100 yrs later someone found it and decided to write a book based on my journal and in that story, some is first person, some is narrative, some is poetic, ect...

Just a thought. I know you generally detest christianity and any plausible validity to it all , but it is possible.

(Not picking a fight, I have posted back and forth with you many times)
 
Joe, it sounds like you have been reading some Thomas Paine or Ethan Allen. I have to agree with you.
 
JohnGalt said:
Joe, it sounds like you have been reading some Thomas Paine or Ethan Allen. I have to agree with you.
Click to expand...

This argument is not new to even Paine or Allen. It has been used before their time. I am using it on this forum to see if anyone can debunk it.
 
Yes, that is ture. I certainly can't. But, I am not trying very hard, I agree.

The whole debunking of your argument is their claim that faith is how you have to take things- Truth and proof are mere trivialities, to believe by those standards would not be truly believe according to them. Thus, to offer proof of their meanings would debunk their concepts, contradicting themselves more than usual-so, you must take these revelations of others by faith. Maybe God might give you truth after you believe.
 
JohnGalt said:
Maybe God might give you truth after you believe.
Click to expand...

God cannot give someone truth. He never does. One earnest Christian pray to God and God tells the person that he elects unconditionally regardless of work. Another pray to God and God tells him his election is conditional. One person pray to God and God tells him to kill evil Muslims. Another pray to God and learn that we must live in peace. One person pray to God and speaks in tongues. Another person pray to God and learn that he must oppose the charismatic movement. One person on radio interpret a passage a certain way, and another come up with an opposite meaning? What happened to the Holy Spirit?

The fact that Christianity is split up into thousands of denominations indicates that God never reveals to them anything. Where is the Holy Spirit who suppose to be in charge?
 
Quigly: Med woman,

As neither you or I weren't there physically, I wonder if there were scrolls of Jesus words and events along with other writings and these scrolls were compiled and rewritten by Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John... If this were the case, then it wouldn't be to hard to compile his words some 40 years later.
*************
M*W: Anything is possible, including Jesus never existing. That's where I have come to recently. Also, anything could have been written and confirmed by later writings.
*************
Quigly: Lets say I wrote a whole journal of my life and put it in a cave and 100 yrs later someone found it and decided to write a book based on my journal and in that story, some is first person, some is narrative, some is poetic, ect...
*************
M*W: If Jesus did exist, he may have written something himself. That would seem likely to me. If Jesus did exist in the person the bible claims he did, then I find it suspect that if he were the savior of the world, surely there would be more proof to his existence. As it was 2000 years ago until today, there is nothing that proves he existed. Therefore, Christianity IMO is dubiously slanted.
*************
Quigly: Just a thought. I know you generally detest christianity and any plausible validity to it all , but it is possible.

(Not picking a fight, I have posted back and forth with you many times)
*************
M*W: I would detest anything that was based on a lie, and I firmly believe Christianity is based on one. If Jesus existed, his existence would provide us with the profound proof that has never been available. After years of researching the truth about Jesus, I always believed him to be a real live person, and the writings about Mary Magdalen confirmed for me his existence. After 20 years of holding this belief, I have recently come to the conclusion that these characters never existed. They were simply the creations of the inventor of Christianity -- Paul.
 
Light Travelling said:
The bible quotes Jesus as saying “they will look but not see, listen but not hear, for god has sealed their ears and eyes”.
Click to expand...
could almost be describing theists here,when it comes to our known evidence for evolution,dont it?
And this is the paradox. For those that “see” will believe through instinct and those that cannot “see” will never believe even if they have the proof that they seek. For they cannot comprehend the kingdom of heaven.
Click to expand...
for they cannot comprehend that Universe just exists and always had ;)
 
I quote the Quran

"Indeed, we have struck for the people a similitude; and if thou bringest them a sign, those who are unbelievers will certainly say "you follow nothing but falsehood", even so, God seals the hearts of those that know not".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top