We are going to Florida in July…

I am serious about “popping in”…Goergia is on the way…

Are you still up for it?

Heck yea, I’m serious! I’ll look forward to it Drop me a line at webmaster@askanatheist.org

Actually we are getting ready to take a vacation pretty soon… and may be passing through…

I know you frequent this site… so I will let you know if your serious…

There are a couple of other things I would like to pick your brain about… and it would be awesome in person…

I have a great friend from Atlanta too… maybe I’ll see her when we are out that way…

Do you believe that the scriptures are true because of your experience or do you believe your experience was divine because of the scriptures?

Great question…

Yes… I believe the scriptures are true because of my experience, and yes I believe my experience was divine because of the scriptures…

Many have had “divine” experiences… but not from God…

I must assume that angelic creatures (like the scripture says), are going to decieve many… and even perform “miracles”…

Think of Muhammad’s experience… (while we are at it, you should do some research on the historical composition of Islam, fascinating but unverifiable),
Muhammad met with an angel… How did he know that angel came from God?

So did Joseph Smith, and many others…

There are many religions, and many divine experiences… but only one truth…

So my answer to that is yes…

I believe the scriptures because I know God, and I believe the experience I had was divine, therefore I believe the scriptures…

You kind of missed the point on the whole Acts thing…

While it is true that some (not a majority) of scholars think the record of Acts skewed by Luke’s bias, the majority does not… but obviously you like to think of it that way.., and you are entitled to do so…but that doesn’t make it true even if it were a majority…

The events in Acts are corroborated by many other writings, (Early manuscripts), that demonstrate the authenticity from a historical perspective…

However even if I based a conclusion on the majority of scholarship… I may still be shooting myself in the foot…

Why might you ask..?

The majority of scholarship at one time believed the world was flat… but that didn’t make it true…

The majority of scholarship at one time believed the sun revolved around the earth, but that doesn’t make it true…

Especially in American culture today, and especially in the realm of scholarship, never has the “majority” been so biased, even amongst Christian circles…

That is why I said true science is diminishing unless a few observers are willing to step outside the “box”…

As far as whether or not Jesus were raised from the dead… the evidence amongst scholars has clearly been presented for years and years, but even many well reknown atheists have conceded to the evidence(from my understanding), and still refuse it due to bias…

It just goes to show that men will believe what they want to believe, over what the facts present, unless it villifies their own opinions…

But a few have taken the box as what it is… a fallible, human measurement that can only observe and weigh what it can fathom, and have learned a great deal about true science…

Ask old Chris Columbus….

I am not sure why we are “sidestepping” Luke’s account in Acts, other than some recent (meaning not 1st century) writer is convinced and has convinced you that it isn’t trustworthy, (though hsitroy and fact show differently),…

You may be surprised to learn that the vast majority of New-Testament scholars (that is, professional researchers that are experts in classical Greek, the history and culture of early to late Roman Empire, contribute regularly to the body of collective knowledge, and are respected by their supporters and detractors alike) agree that Luke’s account is not primarily a historically accurate. Acts was written some 40+ years after Paul wrote. Luke clearly draws from earlier traditions and uses the standard (and identifiable) literary techniques of his day to embellish the traditions he draws upon.

…but If Paul were lying about his own personal accounts, then what reason do the rest of scriptures confirm from a historical standpoint alone, that this was the case…

Where did I say that Paul was lying?

Really that is a rabbit trail argument in and of itself… but it seems that you are being biased towards some recent author somewhere that thinks Acts is unverifiable?

I am amused by your lumping together of all of New Testament scholarship as “some recent author” both here and at the opening of your post I’m guessing from the comment that you are unfamiliar with any view of Luke’s writings other than the plenary verbal inspiration hypothesis? I would be happy point you recommend some good resources that compare and contrast the leading theories (while pointing out where there is consensus and where there is controversy) if you are interested.

Really… I think it is time to move on from this point and say simply this… Either Paul was a liar about Jesus Christ, and His experience with Him, or he was telling the truth…
I never met anyone who would die for what they knew was a lie… and unless the author of a book can raise a man from the dead, and heal people… I am going with Paul…

Where did I say that Paul lied? That Paul was a liar or he was telling the truth are clearly not the only options. It is more likely that Luke’s account in not historically accurate, and Paul never said the words that Luke’s account put in his mouth.

Why must we assume that the creator had to have a creator…

Because you hold that a complex body such as a watch, because of its complex nature, requires us to presume that it has a creator. If you believe that the creator must be more complex than its creation, then the creator needs a creator for the same reason that you claim a watch needs a creator

If you use formulaic logic, you can either prove or disprove anything since it is subjective, and bundary setting based only off of the tools of human measurement…

I’m not adept enough with formulaic logic to prove or disprove anything

For example… I could have an orange, and an ornage drink coaster sitting side by side, and conclude that they were both an orange simply by stating that their color is the same, and both are round..cabon based and exist in matter

Actually, you can’t (you can try though!)

Ultimately it boils down to this…You have already been given the evidence…

I think I have been shown the Pink Unicorn. I’m left wondering why my colleague in observation refuses to look when I point out that the pink die comes off on my hand and that the horn is actually strapped on.

All you have to do is prove that Jesus Christ did not rise from the grave….The whole of christian theology hinges on that one point…Disprove that, and Christianity will fall…

The burden of proof clearly rests upon the apologists to prove that He did.

You want proof that Christianity is real… ?

Yes.

Jesus was raised from the dead…

Give me compelling evidence.

I am going with the scriptures as proof of what I have experienced…

Do you believe that the scriptures are true because of your experience or do you believe your experience was divine because of the scriptures?

There are many experiences, and many that are real… and many conversions in many religions… but only 1 is true… and that was the claim of the man who was raised from the dead…

Why should I believe your view of truth to the exclusion of the opposing views of the “many religions”?

Muhammed is in his grave, so is Buddha, and Confuscius, and so will be Richard Dawkins, and every other man…

And so is Jesus, no? Why should I believe that He is not?

Ultimately… the Timex watch has a munufacturer’s name… and there may be other cheap knock-offs, but Timex has the stamp… The one true God has His stamp.. and it was when Jesus rose from the dead and fulfilled the “manufacturer’s signature) of thousnads of years of prophecies…If you want God to step out of Heaven and speak to you directly.. he already has… did you miss it?

Yes. But it’s much worse than that. Each time I ask someone, who claims not to have missed it, his or her romanticized description of the experience vaporizes under the most minuscule inquiry, and all that remains is an experience that is most easily understood as a perfectly natural experience.

Thank you for your continuing dialogue… I think Kevin will be okay with us continuing…

Thank you!

Really that is a rabbit trail argument in and of itself… but it seems that you are being biased towards some recent author somewhere that thinks Acts is unverifiable?

Really… I think it is time to move on from this point and say simply this… Either Paul was a liar about Jesus Christ, and His experience with Him, or he was telling the truth…

I never met anyone who would die for what they knew was a lie… and unless the author of a book can raise a man from the dead, and heal people… I am going with Paul…

On the issue of reason concerning the timex watch…

Why must we assume that the creator had to have a creator…

If you use formulaic logic, you can either prove or disprove anything since it is subjective, and bundary setting based only off of the tools of human measurement…

For example… I could have an orange, and an ornage drink coaster sitting side by side, and conclude that they were both an orange simply by stating that their color is the same, and both are round..cabon based and exist in matter

there are going to be facts that also counter that they are not the same.. but it depends on the units of measure, and the standards by which they are measured…

If I set the boundaries, then I can manipulate the facts in my favor…. and make them seem truthful… but that isn’t reality…

Science used to be the observation and theroy that held up to proof or disproof… but now it is mostly opinion staged in a “box” of human measure, and tries to fit everything into its measurements, whether they are provable or not…

There are relatively few scientists who are likeminded with the actual intent of historical science…

Again, that is a side issue… nevertheless a good discussion…

Ultimately it boils down to this…

You have already been given the evidence… and the units of measure… but you have chosen not to use them… and the promise of God is that those who are faithful with little will be given more…

As you correctly quoted the Lord though (and even many christians are going to have a hard time with this), if you do not believe… that is part of God’s plan as well… in fact the very fact that you do not believe, even though you have what you need, confirms that what God says is true….

Take a look at Romans 9…

I do think it is funny you compared my “thinking to Paul’s though”… ultimately both of us claim it came from God, not from our own imaginations…

If you really want to “relieve” the world of the Christian delimma… it is really quite simple…

All you have to do is prove that Jesus Christ did not rise from the grave….

The whole of christian theology hinges on that one point…

Disprove that, and Christianity will fall…

It is amazing that the multiple teams of atheists who spend non-stop days, weeks and hours consumed with destructuring Christianity… can’t do it… and haven’t been able to for two thousand years…

You want proof that Christianity is real… ?
Jesus was raised from the dead…

Many an atheist would love to have this claim… but until they can raise themselves from the dead, heal, walk on water, etc… I am going with the scriptures as proof of what I have experienced…

There are many experiences, and many that are real… and many conversions in many religions… but only 1 is true… and that was the claim of the man who was raised from the dead…

Muhammed is in his grave, so is Buddha, and Confuscius, and so will be Richard Dawkins, and every other man…

Ultimately… the Timex watch has a munufacturer’s name… and there may be other cheap knock-offs, but Timex has the stamp…

The one true God has His stamp.. and it was when Jesus rose from the dead and fulfilled the “manufacturer’s signature) of thousnads of years of prophecies…

If you want God to step out of Heaven and speak to you directly.. he already has… did you miss it?

Thank you for your continuing dialogue… I think Kevin will be okay with us continuing…

You know askanatheist, if you would like… you can come and discuss this with me on my blog…

I’ll leave it up to Kevin – I don’t want to take activity away from his blog, especially on a topic that he started – that is, unless he prefers it that way. Then I would be happy to oblige.

Also I hunt and peck… I don’t type… forgive the spelling errors…

Thanks for the discussion and for making the extra effort!

First I have to say that I believe I mis-spoke…concerning Saul of Tarsus… I said Josephus account…
(obviously I was confused.. I have read way too much church history)….

It can be eye-crossing, can’t it? No problem at all!

The actual historical accounts of the life of Paul are best found in early manuscripts like Justyn Martyr, or Clement of Alexandria…and the accounts of Josephus which described the happenings of those early beginnings of the church….

But they are certainly elaborating on Luke’s account.

As for him being a Pharisee… there is no doubt of this historically… and as for being a leader in the pharisees, he was sent to learn under Gamaliel…

That he learned under Gamaliel was Luke’s account again

As for being a memeber of the Sanhedrin… you can look at the account of Stephen’s martyrdom in Acts and see that he was martyred by the Sanhedrin, (of whom Paul gave approval)… Acts 22 Beatings, imprisonment, and death… was Saul’s mission, as history records…

That is Luke’s account again

I have read somewhere in historical accounts that Paul was a member of the Sanhedrin… but I cannot cite the source… other than the account of scripture..(sorry)… I’ll work on this a little more… and get back to you…

Thanks, let me know what you find.

As far as “blind faith”… If I were to view a painting… I would pre-suppose there were a painter based on the evidence of the painting… In the same way I don’t look at my timex watch and say that the hands, the dial, and the band were a process of evolution, but something in my intellect understands that there is design involved…

If you believe a complex system is evidence of a creator, and if the creator is necessarily more complex then his creation, then who created the Creator? That is, if I am to believe that a watch has a watchmaker because a watch is complex, then the watchmaker (the man) must be more complex than the watch. If the man must have a creator because the man is complex, then his creator, God, is more complex then the man. By your reasoning, God must have a creator, and so on ad infinitum. However this infinite regression is clearly not an acceptable conclusion. So we must re-evaluate our premise that all complex systems must have a creator. In fact, we can observe complex systems in nature forming naturally. What’s more we should recognize a trend: the number of things that humanity used to attribute to the divine (due to our lack of understanding) diminishes over time as science matures and the tools of science become more powerful.

I am not trying to be snide, but I think that atheism is really “blind faith”, because you have to shut your eyes and pretend it isn’t there in order to believe there is no God, (or creator), because the evdience of creation suggests not only a creator, but a divine creator… that transcends the cognizance of human technology…

I don’t hear your comments as snide or in any way disrespectful. I hope my comments do not come across to you that way either; they are meant with the utmost respect, sincerity, and candor.

Claiming that my reasoning is actually a rejection of reasoning sounds a lot like Paul’s style of rejoinder (the wise are really fools)! I don’t know if you’ve given much thought to this view or if it is simply an attempt to bring blind faith and reasoned faith on equal footing. I want to consider any evidence, regardless of the conclusion. That is quite different than looking for only that evidence that supports my a-priori position and ignoring any conflicting evidence. It’s hardly a credible characterization to presume that only those that agree with you are willing to look at evidence.

In the same way that you don’t look at your watch and presume that it evolved, evolutionists don’t look at living organisms and presume that they evolved. There are bodies of evidence from various scientific disciplines that independently support the theory. There are no defeaters to the theory to date. Galaxies are very complex structures also, but evolutionists don’t simply presume that they evolved as a way to reject a hypothesis that they were divinely created. Science is not a conspiracy bent on disproving God, science is a process through which we learn to understand an manipulate our universe.

As long as you choose to measure truth by your human intelellect and remain blind to the evidence that you are swimming in… then it is moot to say that faith in God is “blind”… that is kind of hypocritical.. (forgive the tone if it seems condescending), but the argument that faith in God is blind is condescending, and irrational…

Human intelligence is the only intelligence I have If I am indeed a creature of God, then that is what He has given me to work with – presumably this was part of the Plan. I remain open to compelling evidence that God exists. However, for the reasons cited, I don’t find the watchmaker argument compelling.

It is likely that you will never see the evidence though it is right near you, as long as you choose to measure only by the limitations of your own standards and units of measure… but unless you can fathom all mysteries in creation.. it is only theory… and observation… not fact…

Observation (and blind faith) is all I have – and I find blind faith problematic for many reasons – not the least of which is that it primarily requires me to have blind faith in what another person tells me. That’s an awful lot of power to confer on a fellow human being, don’t you think?

Even the fact that men ignore the clear signs of the divinity and nature of God in creation is an evidence of the divinity and nature of God Himself as He stated in the bible through Roman’s 1:18-20
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven …but their thinking became futile …Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools

Good ol’ Paul – the wise are really fools and fools are really wise. I think that sort of logic is more compelling to fools… I mean to the wise… I mean to fools… now he’s got ME doing it!

According to Paul, there should be clear evidence of God’s wrath. I would agree. If Paul is correct, I would expect God’s wrath to be unmistakably divine, wouldn’t you? Can you point me to any unmistakable evidence of divine wrath? If not, do you believe it anyway?

As an aside, I think it unbecoming of a spiritual leader like Paul to resort to name calling as a means of persuasion

You see human intellect is both fallible, and measurable… and the wisdom of God isn’t measurable by human intellect…

That’s what I would expect of a deity too. In fact, I would include that in my definition of a true deity. If I had any reason to believe God existed, I would expect his wisdom to be beyond understanding.

But men, not wanting to believe (blind that is) have closed their eyes because they rather don’t like to believe that something ultimately wiser, and in control, is the master of their destinies, rather than themselves…

Wanting or not wanting to believe is beside the point. For example, I would prefer to believe that God exists. However, since I am willing to consider all available evidence, I am not able. Reasoned faith is a response to evidence. Blind faith is simply holding blindly to premises whether they match reality or not.

For this reason God has allowed them to be “given over” to such things… and their intellect to be darkened (blinded) awaiting due judgment fro Himself, for what is obvious…

In my case, if what you believe is true, then I am awaiting judgment for what is not at all obvious..

That however is not what Faith in God is… Faith in God is light… with evidence clearly seen and understood…

Then we agree! Now all I need to see is the clear evidence. I remain open.

(see Christians aren’t perfect…)

BTW Thanks Kevin for being gracious…