Merged (edited) General thoughts about Christianity and the bible

[Rusty Tyler]

Have you considered that he never walked with a limp before?

I knew the man well.
He had never walked with a limp before. (that I recall)

Do you believe that God healed him, or do you reject my testimony outright?
If so, why?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Again, you are quoting your book as evidence your book is truth.

Anyone can do the same with any other book.

Is that what you have done with evolution?

 

[Olmstead]

I'm not familiar with the LDS claims of supernatural events.
But considering the source, I probably wouldn't agree.

Just answer the question. Why do you accept some claims of supernatural events but reject others?

 

[Mojo]

I knew the man well.
He had never walked with a limp before. (that I recall)

Do you believe that God healed him, or do you reject my testimony outright?
If so, why?

God miraculously made a man who didn't walk with a limp walk without a limp?

 

[JayUtah]

Is that what you have done with evolution?

No. There is objective testable evidence in favor of evolutionary biology.

 

[Thermal]

I had a dreadful headache earlier. I prayed to Allah, and it was gone within 60 minutes! Miracles!

-Paging the Fart Ghost guy, we have some testimony needed in this thread-

 

[JayUtah]

Again, you are quoting your book as evidence your book is truth.

It's perfectly valid to cite to the Bible as a source of Christian belief. On that point it would be considered an authoritative source. Therefore it's valid to use it when describing how a Christian might arrive at a belief that's contrary to some other proposition. However, if the argument then shifts to which proposition—the Christian's belief or the other thing—is more likely to be factually true, the Bible does not substitute for the objective, testable evidence that one would need in order to settle the question.

 

[Thermal]

So you're well motivated to consider yourself a spiritual hero. Did you follow up with him two weeks later to see if the healing had stuck? This has been widely studied. People get into a kind of euphoria during situations where there is a lot of religious fervor. They get an endorphins and activate the placebo effect.

And, relevant: did this person get examined by doctors before and after the healing, and declare with one medically informed voice "◊◊◊◊ me, this is a miracle!" I never seem to see that kind of follow up.

 

[Mojo]

Is that what you have done with evolution?

Do you mean the fact of evolution, or the theory of evolution by natural selection of inherited variation?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Just answer the question. Why do you accept some claims of supernatural events but reject others?

It's my choice. I either buy it or I don't. I have to decide.
Not all claims are legitimate. I don't accept all reports.
(you don't accept any) What's the difference?

 

[Mojo]

It's my choice. I either buy it or I don't. I have to decide.

How do you decide?

 

[Pixel42]

Some other Christians that I respected held the view that evolution was the right way to view origins.

But then I ran into doctrinal issues. (if Adam was not the first man)

If a doctrine contradicts well established fact then the doctrine is wrong.

This should not be a difficult point to either grasp or accept.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I knew the man well.
He had never walked with a limp before. (that I recall)

Do you believe that God healed him, or do you reject my testimony outright?
If so, why?

I think endorphins and adrenalin explain his ignoring discomfort on that day.

Have you considered the possibility that happened and his injury just got better by itself before you next saw him? Or do you perhaps propose that all injuries to people or plants or animals require divine intervention to heal?

I've had a sore back. It made me walk with a limp. I could also walk without a limp if I preferred people not to make a fuss over me, though it was more uncomfortable.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

God miraculously made a man who didn't walk with a limp walk without a limp?

The man arrived at the meeting walking with a cane. (limping)
He was in terrible pain.

 

[Mojo]

The man arrived at the meeting walking with a cane. (limping)
He was in terrible pain.

Here's a little clue for you: if people injure their legs or feet, that are often in pain, and often limp, and need to use a cane. But, though you might be unaware of it, the human body has the ability to heal injuries. Not all injuries are life changing.

Even people who have been turned into a newt have been known to get better.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

That would be your reaction.
Probably the minority position.

The Bible is a collection of religious texts that is central to Christianity or Judaism,
and esteemed in other Abrahamic religions such as Islam. Bibles are anthologies
with varying canonical texts across traditions.

Conversely. The Bible is an arbitrary collection of folk tales and fairy stories believed in without any proof by those who have been brainwashed from childhood to believe in its "TRUTH".

Fortunately more than 70% of the planet's population does not believe in it . Though they mostly believe in similar pernicious nonsense.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Have you considered the possibility that happened and his injury just got better by itself before you next saw him?

He was healed on the spot. He walked freely around the room afterward praising God and waving the cane over his head.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

No. There is objective testable evidence in favor of evolutionary biology.

Information in a book, right?
Isn't the Bible testable evidence?

Again, you are quoting your book as evidence your book is truth.

Anyone can do the same with any other book.

Is that what you have done with evolution?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

If a doctrine contradicts well established fact then the doctrine is wrong.

This should not be a difficult point to either grasp or accept.

Since when do doctrines follow "established fact"?
Isn't that the whole point of a Holy book?
To show us something outside the norm?

This should not be a difficult point to either grasp or accept. - LOL

 

[Mojo]

Information in a book, right?
Isn't the Bible testable evidence?


Is that what you have done with evolution?

The fact that evidence for something has been published doesn't mean that the original evidence doesn't exist.

The difference is, all you have in the case of the Bible is what's written in the book.