Catholic Miracles

[timor]

The incident in Job is passive, however. Can't you see that, even if he ordered Satan to do it indirectly, God actively commanded evil?

Also, please, please, PLEASE stop saying that "God has left us a trustworthy, infallible, inerrant Bible" and that we can "bet [our lives] on what is contained within it". That simply has not been proved - indeed, quite the opposite has been shown. Then, you follow up with an emotional plea towards the sufferings of the "Historical Jesus".

Please give us some respect. We are former Christians, intelligent people, and are *quite* familiar with the Bible, Christian dogma, and Christian history/tradition. We do not need a sermon at the end of every post. Thank you.

 

[CCGR]

I don't mean to sermon every post, just copying the contents verbatim. and providing my source

regarding God commanding evil...it's more like him allowing it, he did set limits on satan on what he could not do to Job. God was still the boss.

 

[timor]

Sorry CCGR, that wasn't directed at you! It was at Watcher! I've very rarely seen you sermon, come to think of it!

As for him allowing Satan to do it, as I said, that's fine for Job, which is clearly passive. However, the passage in question contains an *active* verb, and honestly says nothing close to "God ordered Satan" or "God had Satan" or even "God allowed Satan". It says "God moved".

 

[Watcher]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Oct. 22 2003,3:10)]The incident in Job is passive, however. Can't you see that, even if he ordered Satan to do it indirectly, God actively commanded evil?

Also, please, please, PLEASE stop saying that "God has left us a trustworthy, infallible, inerrant Bible" and that we can "bet [our lives] on what is contained within it". That simply has not been proved - indeed, quite the opposite has been shown. Then, you follow up with an emotional plea towards the sufferings of the "Historical Jesus".

Please give us some respect. We are former Christians, intelligent people, and are *quite* familiar with the Bible, Christian dogma, and Christian history/tradition. We do not need a sermon at the end of every post. Thank you.

This is simply an illustration of God's anger that David trusted more in the strength of his army and Himself rather than God. Why do you read more into than what's there. Who do you think caused David to doubt God? God? Oh, that makes a lot of sense. I'm sorry, but you miss the theological core completely.

I won't sit here and argue inerrancy with you anymore as it's fruitless. I know the truth that has been revealed to me by the Holy Spirit. I affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy. I further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original. I deny that any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of the autographs. I further deny that this absence renders the assertion of Biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant (taken from "The Chicago Statement on Inerrancy").

Every single error you have claimed has been refuted and explained. One day, sooner than you think, we'll find out who was right.

Have you ever thought what if you've got it all wrong. Let's hypothetically say I'm the one that has it all wrong. What would I lose? Nothing. As Paul says, why not eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. There's nothing else to look forward to! Yet what if it is truth. What do you lose? Everything.

Since you claim you were a Christian once upon a time,  (which I find hard to believe...I personally feel it's impossible to turn away from the truth once you're indwelled with the Holy Spirit. If you could turn away, you would be willingly aligning yourself with the enemy thus commiting the unforgivable sin, thus destined for eternal damnation. So I completely question your declaration that you were a Christian) let me ask you a question.

Who do you say Jesus of Nazareth was?

 

[CCGR]

The Hebrew verb wayyaset, translated “moved” (NKJV) or “incited (NASV), is identical in both passages. God and Satan’s actions are described using the same word. The difference lies with the sense in which the word is used: Satan incited (or tempted—cf. 1 Thessalonians 3:5) David more directly, while God is spoken of as having incited David because He allowed such temptation to take place. The Hebrews often used active verbs to express “not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said to do” (Bullinger, 2898, p. 823, emp. in orig.). Throughout the Bible, God’s allowance of something to take place often is described by the sacred writers as having been done by the Lord.

The book of Exodus records how “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart” (Exodus 7:3,13; 9:12; 10:1; et al.), but it was not that God directly forced Pharaoh to reject His will. Rather, God hardened his heart in the sense that God provided the circumstances and the occasion for Pharaoh to reject His will. God sent Moses to place His demands before Pharaoh, even accompanying His Word with miracles—to confirm the divine origin of the message (cf. Mark 16:20). Pharaoh made up his own mind to resist God’s demands. God merely provided the occasion for Pharaoh to demonstrate his unyielding attitude. If God had not sent Moses, Pharaoh would not have been faced with the dilemma of whether to release the Israelites. So God was certainly the initiator of the circumstances that led to Pharaoh’s sin, but He was not the author (or direct cause) of Pharaoh’s defiance (see Butt and Miller, 2003).

http://www.apologeticspress.org/abdiscr/abdiscr96.html

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (CCGR @ Oct. 21 2003,6:43)]I didn't mean to slam anyone.  

I know. I was saying it to the writer of the website. Greanted he can't hear me, but that doesn't stop me.

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Oct. 21 2003,2:52)]Big J, you nailed the God/Satan one.

Thanks.
You did great on Lazarus.

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (Watcher @ Oct. 21 2003,9:51)]In 2 Samuel 24:1 God incites David to number Israel. God is angry with David and wants to teach him not to trust in his military might, but to trust in Him. So God moved to allow David to count the fighting men of Israel. God uses Satan to do this, which is why in 1 Cro. 21:1, it says Satan moved David to count the men. Both are obviously true. God either sent Satan or allowed Satan to incite David.

Favor.

I would like you to read the two passages, in context. Think about them. Pray over them, if you would like. If you still see them agreeing, we'll talk again.

Fair?

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (Watcher @ Oct. 21 2003,9:51)]

Quote[/b] ]I don’t expect this to make sense to you because God’s ways are foreign to you.

Right. All the years I spent as a Christian was...what?

Quote[/b] ]God has left us a trustworthy, infallible, inerrant Bible.

With errors.

Quote[/b] ]You can bet your life depends on what is contained within it.

Please tell me how the Bible is right and the Koran, Book of Mormon, Vedas are all wrong.

Quote[/b] ]Either way, Jesus was either a lunatic, a liar, or He was Lord.

Or he never existed.

Quote[/b] ]One way or another, you’ll live for eternity.

Or I'll die and be dead forever.

Quote[/b] ]Where you’ll spend eternity is up to you.

Exactly. So if I'm wrong, and there is an Allah, I'll save a seat for you.

Quote[/b] ]I think what would be a wise study for every skeptic is to examine the 'Historical Jesus.' Find the historical truth out for yourself. This man suffered, was brutally killed, and rose again so you would be with Him in paradise forever.

Please (seriously) share with us...where should I start looking? The Bible doesn't count.

Quote[/b] ]Can you grasp how deep His love is?

Yup. God loved the world so much that he sent himself to die for something that an ancestor did...therefore sacrificing himself to save us from himself and that which he created to torture us forever. Did I miss anything?

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (Watcher @ Oct. 22 2003,3:30)]Have you ever thought what if you've got it all wrong. Let's hypothetically say I'm the one that has it all wrong. What would I lose? Nothing. As Paul says, why not eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. There's nothing else to look forward to! Yet what if it is truth. What do you lose? Everything.

Oh...my...goddess...I CANNOT believe you just tried to pull Pascal's wager.

So what are you going to do when Allah kicks your behind?

OK, so you're a Christian. Vishnu isn't going to appreciate that.

Heck...Jehovah is going to ask you why you didn't read the 10 commandments...you know...about not worshiping anyone but him.

And Zeus and Thor aren't going to be very happy either...

Oh, and what of the god of Spinoza? Well, I doubt he would care one way or the other.

 

[Watcher]

Quote[/b] (Big J @ Oct. 22 2003,5:21)]

Quote[/b] (Watcher @ Oct. 22 2003,3:30)]Have you ever thought what if you've got it all wrong. Let's hypothetically say I'm the one that has it all wrong. What would I lose? Nothing. As Paul says, why not eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. There's nothing else to look forward to! Yet what if it is truth. What do you lose? Everything.

Oh...my...goddess...I CANNOT believe you just tried to pull Pascal's wager.

So what are you going to do when Allah kicks your behind?

OK, so you're a Christian.  Vishnu isn't going to appreciate that.

Heck...Jehovah is going to ask you why you didn't read the 10 commandments...you know...about not worshiping anyone but him.

And Zeus and Thor aren't going to be very happy either...

Oh, and what of the god of Spinoza?  Well, I doubt he would care one way or the other.

None that you mentioned died and rose again. I think I'll take Jesus. And By the way, Yahweh=Jehovah=Adonai=Jesus=God=Literally: He who will be

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (Watcher @ Oct. 22 2003,3:30)]Since you claim you were a Christian once upon a time, (which I find hard to believe...I personally feel it's impossible to turn away from the truth once you're indwelled with the Holy Spirit. If you could turn away, you would be willingly aligning yourself with the enemy thus commiting the unforgivable sin, thus destined for eternal damnation. So I completely question your declaration that you were a Christian) let me ask you a question.

Who do you say Jesus of Nazareth was?

LOL

Of course...if someone loses their faith, they must have never been saved in the first place. I personally take that as an insult.

But to answer your question...
Jesus of Nazarath, as depicted in the Bible, never existed. There may have been a "Messiah" wandering around Judea, named "Joshua"...because there were a heck of a lot of them (Messiahs) wandering around during that time, and Joshua was a pretty common name.

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (Watcher @ Oct. 22 2003,4:23)]None that you mentioned died and rose again. I think I'll take Jesus.

Oh, I'm SO sorry.

What are you going to do when Mithra meets you and shows you his nail holes?

Or...how about Odin? He can show you the scars from his hanging.

Krishna was crucified too...and he rose again.

There are more...

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (Watcher @ Oct. 21 2003,8:13)]1,700 in 2 Sam. 8:4 in the Massoretic text is likely a copyist error, as both the Septuagint and 1 Chronicles 18:4 all say 7,000. The Massoretic text also has a grammatical error that indicates a word was missing. This means the number in our copies of 1 Chr. 18:4 (7,000) is most likely correct.

Really?
So...the Bible has an error?

 

[Watcher]

Quote[/b] (Big J @ Oct. 22 2003,5:25)]But to answer your question...
Jesus of Nazarath, as depicted in the Bible, never existed.  There may have been a "Messiah" wandering around Judea, named "Joshua"...because there were a heck of a lot of them (Messiahs) wandering around during that time, and Joshua was a pretty common name.

Extra biblical references to Jesus of Nazareth (Miryai in Aramaic if you prefer)

Tacitus - 1st century Roman Historian: "But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind."


Josephus - Jewish Historian (93 A.D.): Now about this time arose an occasion for new disturbances, a certain Jesus, a wizard of a man, if indeed he may be called a man, who was the most monstrous of men, whom his disciples call a son of God, as having done wonders such as no man has ever done.... He was in fact a teacher of astonishing tricks to such men as accept the abnormal with delight.... And he seduced many Jews and many also of the Greek nation, and was regarded by them as the Messiah.... And when, on the indictment of the principal men among us, Pilate had sentenced him to the cross, still those who before had admired him did not cease to rave. For it seemed to them that having been dead for three days, he had appeared to them alive again, as the divinely-inspired prophets had foretold -- these and ten thousand other wonderful things -- concerning him. And even now the race of those who are called 'Messianists' after him is not extinct.

Suctonius - Roman Historian: Twice in his history book, Suetonius specifically mentioned Christ or His followers. He wrote, for example: “Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbance at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from the city” (note that in Acts 18:2 Luke mentioned this expulsion by Claudius). Chrestus is a misspelling of Christos, the Greek word for Messiah. Suetonius further commented: “Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief.” Again, it is clear that Suetonius and the Roman government had feelings of hatred toward Christ and His so-called “mischievous” band of rebels. It is equally clear that Suetonius (and, in fact, most of Rome) recognized that Christ was the noteworthy Founder of a historical religion.

Pliny - Roman Govenor: provided hostile testimony to the life of Jesus. In a letter he wrote around the year A.D. 110, he used the terms “Christian” or “Christians” seven times, and wrote the name “Christ” three times. It is undeniably the case that Christians, with Christ as their Founder, had multiplied in such a way as to draw the attention of the Emperor and his officials by the time of Pliny. After examining this kind of evidence, it is impossible to deny the fact that Jesus Christ was recognized as an actual, historical person.

Even a casual reader who glances over the testimony of the hostile Roman witnesses will be struck by the fact that these men did not portray Christ as the Son of God or the Savior of the world. They verbally stripped Him of His Sonship, denied His glory, and belittled His magnificence. They described Him to their contemporaries, and for posterity, as a mere man. Yet even though they were greatly mistaken about Who He was, they nevertheless documented that He was. And for that we are indebted to them.

 

[Watcher]

Quote[/b] (Big J @ Oct. 22 2003,5:29)]

Quote[/b] (Watcher @ Oct. 21 2003,8:13)]1,700 in 2 Sam. 8:4 in the Massoretic text is likely a copyist error, as both the Septuagint and 1 Chronicles 18:4 all say 7,000. The Massoretic text also has a grammatical error that indicates a word was missing. This means the number in our copies of 1 Chr. 18:4 (7,000) is most likely correct.

Really?
So...the Bible has an error?

If you missed this from the previous post, my affirmation on the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible is below. You have yet to prove to me I am wrong in my belief stated below, so please keep trying. I'm enjoying the tennis match. You've still yet to show me an irrefutable error that proves my belief in my affirmation of inerrancy (stated below) is wrong.

I know the truth that has been revealed to me by the Holy Spirit. I affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy. I further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original. I deny that any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of the autographs. I further deny that this absence renders the assertion of Biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant (taken from "The Chicago Statement on Inerrancy").

So to answer your question, no the inspired Word of God does not have an error.

 

[Grand Master]

Lol, Big J. Some nice points made.

Watcher, how do you propose that someone is supposed to come to believe in something that they can't believe in? Saying, "I believe in God because it's the safe bet" isn't real faith anyway.

Since I started reading these forums, my faith has not strengthened, it has weakened. The reason for this is that I have started thinking about things God-related a lot more rather than going along with things as I have done most times in the past. In my mind, after a lot of thinking, there is really no reason to believe that a god exists, although I admit that I haven't ruled out the possibility.

I think most people just follow tradition, and this is the main reason for their faith. I don't think most people of *any* faith have taken much time to think about things and make an independent decision based on reason and rationality. Actually, I am in a predicament of my own because of this. My family goes to Church on Sunday and I am expected to be there with them as well. Based on my present state of mind and beliefs, I have a problem being there. The problem for me is that I really have no choice since I think there is a good chance my family would disown me or do something of that nature if I just told them that I have a problem with being there and that I doubt the existance of a god.

 

[timor]

Big J is all over this thing.

Your personal emotions towards the Bible, Watcher, are not going to convince us. Why has God revealed so much to you, and yet done nothing to convince us atheists whom He oh so dearly wants to save (but can't, unless we do this and that and believe in the other thing).

Really, though, there's not much I can say. Big J covered Pascal's Wager, not saved never saved, etc.

I can, however, input something regarding the Historical Jesus. Those four whom you mentioned wrote quite a bit after the time Jesus was supposed to have lived - sure, it doesn't seem all that bad, especially considering how long it's been since the "actual" events, but the best those texts can do is refer to Christians in the same way that modern historians and writers can. Furthermore, that Josephus passage is widely believed to have been tampered with. Other versions of that text (as a whole) contain no mention of Jesus. Furthermore, most of the versions I've seen (except yours) that mention Jesus say "He was the Messiah", not "He was regarded by many as the Messiah". Why would a Jew call someone the Messiah, and not be a follower? As for your version, it looks like some more tampering has been done.....

 

[Watcher]

GM,

I believe in Jesus because He took my place on that cross. He was spit on, punched, slapped, humiliated, flogged until His back looked like hamburger, verbally assaulted, betrayed, endured the cruelest, slowest, most painful way to die, just for me. You cannot deny the Historical record. But allow me to let you in on a little secret. If you are looking for empirical, rational evidence that Jesus Christ is who He says He is, you're out of luck. If that was freely available, most of the whole world would believe. Faith comes by hearing and hearing through the Word of God. You have to walk out on a limb. God will not force you to worship Him (yet...as we all know, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess He is Lord). God wants us to chose Him.

You do have a choice. God freely gives you that right. I pray you make the right one.

 

[Watcher]

Quote[/b] (timor @ Oct. 22 2003,6:14)]Big J is all over this thing.

Your personal emotions towards the Bible, Watcher, are not going to convince us. Why has God revealed so much to you, and yet done nothing to convince us atheists whom He oh so dearly wants to save (but can't, unless we do this and that and believe in the other thing).

Really, though, there's not much I can say. Big J covered Pascal's Wager, not saved never saved, etc.

I can, however, input something regarding the Historical Jesus. Those four whom you mentioned wrote quite a bit after the time Jesus was supposed to have lived - sure, it doesn't seem all that bad, especially considering how long it's been since the "actual" events, but the best those texts can do is refer to Christians in the same way that modern historians and writers can. Furthermore, that Josephus passage is widely believed to have been tampered with. Other versions of that text (as a whole) contain no mention of Jesus. Furthermore, most of the versions I've seen (except yours) that mention Jesus say "He was the Messiah", not "He was regarded by many as the Messiah". Why would a Jew call someone the Messiah, and not be a follower? As for your version, it looks like some more tampering has been done.....

Hi Timor,

You're really digging deep now, aren't you? You can't read that and tell me that doesn't have Josephus' voice, tone and style all over it. Those last two are mocking Jesus. But anyway, you believe what you want. It's not widely believed to have been tampered with. You're just in denial. I assume the others were fake as well. *sigh*

I'm out for a bit, be back later tonight.