Same Sex Marriage Re-Visited.

[Roses]

I think that you will find that Christians have come to know Christ, rather than to have met him.

It is hard to know a character who is only featured in a storybook.

[SteveH]

It is hard to know a character who is only featured in a storybook.

This is true. Fortunately, Christ is much more than that.

[jeremyp]

This is true. Fortunately, Christ is much more than that.

Not enough for Christians to be prepared to make sacrifices for their principles apparently.

[Spud]

Excuses, excuses. 

And more braver? Just braver, or at a push more brave.

Sorry Trent, had just been reading a long list of YouTube comments in which American and Russian warplanes were being compared. I think the style in which the Russian posters were speaking English rubbed off on me.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

All the same, surely that would give you enough bravery to resign a job you couldn't perform correctly due to a matter of conscience.

Such as?

[Roses]

This is true. Fortunately, Christ is much more than that.

He is a character in the Bible that is all. Even though believers think he is around somewhere in the ether, there is no evidence to support that idea.

[Spud]

All the same, surely that would give you enough bravery to resign a job you couldn't perform correctly due to a matter of conscience.

I was quite brave because three of the staff were angry but I still went back the next morning.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

He is a character in the Bible that is all. Even though believers think he is around somewhere in the ether, there is no evidence to support that idea.

He is also mentioned within Jewish writings, and some Roman writings. we have done this before.

[Spud]

He is a character in the Bible that is all. Even though believers think he is around somewhere in the ether, there is no evidence to support that idea.

There is evidence, it just isn't the kind of evidence you are looking for

[Rhiannon]

I was quite brave because three of the staff were angry but I still went back the next morning.

Why do you think they were angry?

[Roses]

There is evidence, it just isn't the kind of evidence you are looking for

Well present your 'evidence' then.

[Spud]

Well present your 'evidence' then.

I think I should have said, "that [the Bible] is evidence", rather than "there is evidence".

[Roses]

I think I should have said, "that [the Bible] is evidence", rather than "there is evidence".

Of course the Bible isn't evidence, that is a silly thing to say.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Of course the Bible isn't evidence, that is a silly thing to say.

Why not?

Have you ever read about Arius?

Are you claiming that he never existed?

[Roses]

Why not?

Have you ever read about Arius?

Are you claiming that he never existed?

What has he got to do with whether the Bible has any credence?

[Anchorman]

Well present your 'evidence' then.

Oh, 'eck........
Er.....how often have folk asked YOU to back up ideas with evidence, and waited..and waited....and waited?

[Anchorman]

What has he got to do with whether the Bible has any credence?

   




Bits of the Bible - well, quite a lot, really, can be anchored in history.
Archaeology confirms a lot of the later Old Testament.
There are fragments of stuff from the late first century - not al ot, but we wouldn't expect much anyway - that confirm bits of the New.
To dismiss the entire corpus of Scripture out of hand would be an error: even atheist scholars admit that!

[Roses]

   




Bits of the Bible - well, quite a lot, really, can be anchored in history.
Archaeology confirms a lot of the later Old Testament.
There are fragments of stuff from the late first century - not al ot, but we wouldn't expect much anyway - that confirm bits of the New.
To dismiss the entire corpus of Scripture out of hand would be an error: even atheist scholars admit that!

I dismiss the less than credible stories in the Bible like the creation story, Noah's Flood and the things accredited to Jesus. 

[Anchorman]

I dismiss the less than credible stories in the Bible like the creation story, Noah's Flood and the things accredited to Jesus. 

 


Fairy 'nuff....     
As you know, I regard the Pentateuch as theology rather than history, and can provide evidence as to whay I do this.
Equally, since there is virtually nothing outside the Gospels to verify Christ's miracles, history has nothing to either confirm or deny them.
That brings it down to faith and trust.
We've done the Resurrection bit....there are a tantalising few bits outside Scripture which allude to it, but again, it's a faith thing.

[Roses]

 


Fairy 'nuff....     
As you know, I regard the Pentateuch as theology rather than history, and can provide evidence as to whay I do this.
Equally, since there is virtually nothing outside the Gospels to verify Christ's miracles, history has nothing to either confirm or deny them.
That brings it down to faith and trust.
We've done the Resurrection bit....there are a tantalising few bits outside Scripture which allude to it, but again, it's a faith thing.

If Jesus did resurrect why was he supposedly seen by a few of his followers, not those who demanded his execution?

[Gordon]

Why not?

Have you ever read about Arius?

Are you claiming that he never existed?

In what way is the existence of Arius relevant?

That he had an interpretation that others disagreed with and regarded as heretical would, I'd have thought, be an indication that whatever the Bible says beyond what is trivially true (such as placenames) can be problematic where subjectivity and possible biases are involved.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

In what way is the existence of Arius relevant?

That he had an interpretation that others disagreed with and regarded as heretical would, I'd have thought, be an indication that whatever the Bible says beyond what is trivially true (such as placenames) can be problematic where subjectivity and possible biases are involved.

Erm ..are you claiming that Arius never existed?

[Gordon]

Erm ..are you claiming that Arius never existed?

Nope - just wondering why you think the existence of Arius is a relevant point.

[SteveH]

If Jesus did resurrect why was he supposedly seen by a few of his followers, not those who demanded his execution?

Why should he, and how do you know he didn't? He appeared to 200 people on a single occasion, most of whom were still alive when it was recorded in what became the New Testament.

[Anchorman]

If Jesus did resurrect why was he supposedly seen by a few of his followers, not those who demanded his execution?

Why not? Why wasn't the death of Tutankhamun better recorded? Why wasn't the suicide of Cleopatra recorded by more than one source? Why is there only one account of Cearsar's first invasion of britain? Because that's all we have. That does not mean that there were more accounts - all it means is that those accounts are all we have.