can anyone please give me proof that Jesus Christ is real?

[c.moore]

Originally posted by jjjg

Well all right, keep the ten million! I just wanted some extra spending cash.

At least try working for it!

 

[c.moore]

Originally posted by Aimiel

I wonder if the whole point of this thread is to help C. Moore with his homework, provide his teacher with proof that Christ is real or provide the answers that C. Moore is searching for, because his faith is weak? Perhaps knowing the answer to that would help better direct responses.

did you see this?

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/did_jesus_really_live.html

 

[c.moore]

Originally posted by jjjg

C.Moore, are you going to play your drums at your church revivals? If not can I have your drumset?

I don`t think so.
I might just flow into vooodooo and need some drums.
Maybe it a way to raise the Zombies.

 

[gimp]

About the original question that started this thread....

All thoughout the Bible I have read it constantly speaks of faith. The Bible even defines faith as being the substance of things hoped for. Now if this is true then how can faith be required if things can be empirically proven true? Would not that be eliminating faith?

I can physically prove 2 + 2 = 4. Because of that I don't need faith to believe it. I know it, I don't believe it or have faith that it is true. The Bible says that one can only accept Jesus Christ by faith. I see nothing in the Bible about empirical proof. Everything I have seen in the Bible requires faith.

So then I ask, is it not a fool's mission to attempt to prove that which requires faith to believe in?

 

[Granite]

Originally posted by gimp

About the original question that started this thread....

All thoughout the Bible I have read it constantly speaks of faith. The Bible even defines faith as being the substance of things hoped for. Now if this is true then how can faith be required if things can be empirically proven true? Would not that be eliminating faith?

I can physically prove 2 + 2 = 4. Because of that I don't need faith to believe it. I know it, I don't believe it or have faith that it is true. The Bible says that one can only accept Jesus Christ by faith. I see nothing in the Bible about empirical proof. Everything I have seen in the Bible requires faith.

So then I ask, is it not a fool's mission to attempt to prove that which requires faith to believe in?

There's a word for people who believe in things no one else can see, and trust in things that cannot be proven: delusion.

 

[Aimiel]

Originally posted by c.moore

did you see this?

http://www...

Yes, I did. Is that your answer? Do you live now by sight? Is evidence your god? I don't understand, and just want to know: what is it that you believe? Where do you stand? Are we doing your homework, or just helping you to try to witness to a 'tough crowd' (your teacher)?

Did you see this?

www.jesusisreal.org

http://www.answersingenesis.org

 

[gimp]

There's a word for people who believe in things no one else can see, and trust in things that cannot be proven: delusion.

So, are you saying then that anyone who has faith in anything is delusional?

To have faith in something means that you have seen evidence that you believe, but evidence does not equal empirical proof, and in the dictionary definitions of faith I see nothing said about empirical proof.

If your above statement were true would not delusion and faith be synonyms in the dictionary?

 

[Aimiel]

I thank God that we have a more sure word of prophecy than any eyewitness account, whereunto we do well to take heed: The Holy Ghost, Who reveals The Truth to our hearts. He is Who shows us that God's Word is true. He is Who reveals The Truth to our hearts, when all our circumstances say otherwise. Thank God for His Presence in our lives!!! :thumb:

 

[Granite]

Originally posted by gimp

So, are you saying then that anyone who has faith in anything is delusional?

To have faith in something means that you have seen evidence that you believe, but evidence does not equal empirical proof, and in the dictionary definitions of faith I see nothing said about empirical proof.

If your above statement were true would not delusion and faith be synonyms in the dictionary?

I wouldn't write off faith of any kind as a delusion, no. Fantasy, yes. Maybe a self-delusion of some kind...

 

[jjjg]

C.Moore, about how much would a set like that cost?

 

[gimp]

I wouldn't write off faith of any kind as a delusion, no. Fantasy, yes. Maybe a self-delusion of some kind...

Interesting. I guess you consider everything for which you have seen evidence for, but not empirical proof, and happen to believe it works, to just be fantasy then.

As you will see below all theories would then seem in your estimation to be fantasies for theories are based on evidence, not empirical proof. When a theory is proven empirically it then becomes a law, so you are stuck in a pretty strange place with your definition. Theories are speculation, and hpotheses and it takes faith to believe that they are true, yet you by your definition would consider them fantasies.

You have a rather strange way of looking at the world.

Main Entry: the·o·ry
Pronunciation: 'thE-&-rE, 'thi(-&)r-E
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ries
Etymology: Late Latin theoria, from Greek theOria, from theOrein
1 : the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2 : abstract thought : SPECULATION
3 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>
4 a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action <her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn> b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances -- often used in the phrase in theory <in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all>
5 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <wave theory of light>
6 a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>
synonym see HYPOTHESIS

 

[c.moore]

Originally posted by gimp

About the original question that started this thread....

All thoughout the Bible I have read it constantly speaks of faith. The Bible even defines faith as being the substance of things hoped for. Now if this is true then how can faith be required if things can be empirically proven true? Would not that be eliminating faith?

I can physically prove 2 + 2 = 4. Because of that I don't need faith to believe it. I know it, I don't believe it or have faith that it is true. The Bible says that one can only accept Jesus Christ by faith. I see nothing in the Bible about empirical proof. Everything I have seen in the Bible requires faith.

So then I ask, is it not a fool's mission to attempt to prove that which requires faith to believe in?

This is the point of my teacher is why need faith or to believe when you already know.

Let me ask this question again which I ask at the beginning.

What would you prefer , believing , hoping or knowing???

 

[c.moore]

Originally posted by jjjg

C.Moore, about how much would a set like that cost?

In dollars I think you might can get one for about $2.000

 

[gimp]

This is the point of my teacher is why need faith or to believe when you already know.

Let me ask this question again which I ask at the beginning.

What would you prefer , believing , hoping or knowing???

I don't know that I am a good one to answer your question for you, but here goes anyway. It seems to me that the Bible itself says faith is required by God. So, if He is the one making the rules it doesn't seem to matter which one I would prefer does it?

Wouldn't a more reasonable question be: Why does God require faith? Does it not at least get to the heart of the matter?

 

[c.moore]

Originally posted by gimp

I don't know that I am a good one to answer your question for you, but here goes anyway. It seems to me that the Bible itself says faith is required by God. So, if He is the one making the rules it doesn't seem to matter which one I would prefer does it?

Wouldn't a more reasonable question be: Why does God require faith? Does it not at least get to the heart of the matter?

You don`t have to use faith when you already know that is the difference.

I think if we all know what jesus did for us on the cross we can know we are already healed and have peace, but some are still hoping and trying to build up their faith to a confidence knowing.

 

[jjjg]

C.Moore, I agreed from the beginning that the outside sources are obscure and full of errors but that is understandable as why would Jewish or pagan sources record Christian sources. Not to mention that Christianity didn't start until Christ was crucified.

But there is no reason not to rely on Christian sources as authentic. No other doctrine has been studied more than Christian history and doctrine.

 

[Granite]

Originally posted by jjjg

C.Moore, I agreed from the beginning that the outside sources are obscure and full of errors but that is understandable as why would Jewish or pagan sources record Christian sources. Not to mention that Christianity didn't start until Christ was crucified.

But there is no reason not to rely on Christian sources as authentic. No other doctrine has been studied more than Christian history and doctrine.

What Christian sources or history, outside of scripture, are you referring to?

 

[Rolf Ernst]

pfeiffer--with the understanding--or lack of understanding--you have of scripture, I hope you DO think I am a heretic.

Your theology is based on your overestimation of the power of your own reasoning, and upon denying the literal and full meaning of Scripture

 

[gimp]

You don`t have to use faith when you already know that is the difference.

I guess I do not understand your statement here. From what I have read of Christianity it says God makes the rules. If I am to accept it, then I must also accept its basic premises, and it seems to me that Christianity's most basic premise is that God makes the rules.

What is there about this that takes faith? What would take faith, or so it seems to me, would be the acceptance of Christianity in the first place. That's where faith would be involved. One must accept first of all that God is real and then that the Bible is true. If one does not accept those two basic premises then how can one "know" anything about Christianity?

And back to your original question.... When I look for an answer to a "why" I usually ask "what" is trying to be accomplished. So, in Christianity's case I would have to ask what is God trying to accomplish with/in/for people if he is requiring faith from them.

My kids have faith in me because they trust me to do what I tell them I will do. It seems that all humans operate on this type of level. So, why is God requiring faith then? What is it he is trying to accomplish with people? As faith and trust are kind of synonymous what does it say of God that only trust and faith please him as the Bible seems to say? There must some kind of common sense answer to this.

 

[c.moore]

Originally posted by jjjg

C.Moore, I agreed from the beginning that the outside sources are obscure and full of errors but that is understandable as why would Jewish or pagan sources record Christian sources. Not to mention that Christianity didn't start until Christ was crucified.

But there is no reason not to rely on Christian sources as authentic. No other doctrine has been studied more than Christian history and doctrine.

My teacher said no other religion exept Islam has copied and stolen belief and traditions and ritual as christiainity and Jewish religion.