TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TS: 'You don't set me off."

Something sure does.

---

Maybe I set you off.

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TS: 'You don't set me off."

Something sure does.

---

Maybe I set you off.

---

Nope. You sure do love denial, though ...

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

I don't think that's the kind of question that textual criticism can answer.

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

But then wouldn't that be a miracle that you don't believe? The problem would still remain.

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TS: 'You don't set me off."

Something sure does.

---

Maybe I set you off.

---

Nope. You sure do love denial, though ...

---

Hmmm?

"Maybe I set you off." Statement


"Nope. You sure do love denial, though ..." Denial


Do you think you're contradicting yourself? (I'm sure you don't.)

---

TexasScientist said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

But then wouldn't that be a miracle that you don't believe? The problem would still remain.

---

That would render belief in miracles immaterial.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

I don't think that's the kind of question that textual criticism can answer.

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

But then wouldn't that be a miracle that you don't believe? The problem would still remain.

---

That would render belief in miracles immaterial.

---

No it wouldn't. Only a supernatural form of communication would qualify as "unequivocal" to you, and your inherent aversion to that possibility would lead you to rationalize such an occurrence as being just a hallucination not to be believed.

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

I don't think that's the kind of question that textual criticism can answer.

---

Hearsay is no basis for making assumptions nor belief.

---

TexasScientist said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

But then wouldn't that be a miracle that you don't believe? The problem would still remain.

---

That would render belief in miracles immaterial.

---

No it wouldn't. Only a supernatural form of communication would qualify as "unequivocal" to you, and your inherent aversion to that possibility would lead you to rationalize such an occurrence as being just a hallucination not to be believed.

---

You seem to have lack of faith in your imaginary god's ability to reveal himself in an unequivocal, imperial even testable way.

---

TexasScientist said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The key point here, from what I see, is whether you are willing to accept the Gospel as Christ taught it, and by that I mean the written accounts of what Christ did and said in the Scriptural accounts.

I mean, when we hear ministers quote Christ's command to 'take up your cross and follow me', we are used to sermons about moral responsibility and personal courage, but think about the fact that Christ said this, then was actually scourged with whips and hung upon a cross until he died. Think about the fact that - except for John - all of Christ's disciples died violent deaths. When we look at the hard reality, it's scary to be a Christian.

We like to live in a world where Christians are protected from persecution, where being Christian is to have beliefs and practices which are mainstream and therefore receive no threats or trouble. But to live as a follower of Christ means to take a stand which sometimes has great personal cost, and that's made clear throughout Scripture. The prophets of the Old Testament, for example, were commonly mocked and ignored by the people, some like Jeremiah were literally thrown into wells or even killed, others were ignored unless the people and Kings happened to like what the prophet said. People who live by faith have commonly been cut out from social castes and mocked as backward and resisting progress. Even here in the United States those who live by strict Christian principles are considered weird and maybe a bit stupid, like the Quakers or the Amish.

I have tried to be a good man, a good husband and father and citizen, but on reflection I worry that too often I do what pleases my sense of right and good, rather than serving God's glory and will. Part of the purpose to the Church is to provide a moral lodestone, faithful to Scripture, so men can check their bearings and find their way.

Mocking anchors leads to shipwreck.

---

I rationalized faith that way once. The problem is we don't really know what Jesus said or did, or what actually happened to his disciples.

---

That seems to be an epistemological problem rather than a problem with the claims of Jesus as such. What kind of documentation, consistent with the practices of the time, would convince you of what Jesus said or did?

---

Writing about "miracles" he did is another problem in and of itself, as far as believability.

---

Assuming miracles occurred, is there any way around that problem? How should the author deal with it?

---

Well if there is a god, why rely on an author to communicate anything? Why not do it directly and unequivocally?

---

But then wouldn't that be a miracle that you don't believe? The problem would still remain.

---

That would render belief in miracles immaterial.

---

No it wouldn't. Only a supernatural form of communication would qualify as "unequivocal" to you, and your inherent aversion to that possibility would lead you to rationalize such an occurrence as being just a hallucination not to be believed.

---

You seem to have lack of faith in your imaginary god's ability to reveal himself in an unequivocal, imperial even testable way.

---