Sorry, I meant Thomas doubted and received verification in person. We receive truth by reason and reading. We are most blessed because we trust and verify as opposed to distrust and distrust and distrust like Thomas. Thomas had eleven faithful eyewitnesses and the scriptures demanded two or three to verify facts in evidence.

*Furthermore, this view of believing without any objective evidence coheres precisely with what Paul taught when he said that believers “walk by faith, not by sight.”*

No, that is referring to the future. We believe the past events because of evidence. We trust God when walking forward, towards future ambitions and not by sight, of course.

As for revisiting contradictions with you, what would that accomplish? We both know if we are lacking visual, material sight on an object, we can be doubting Thomas’s or not, right?

We also both know that an apologist can only say in response to a contradiction, “Here’s what may have occured,” aka speculation. I’ve already put forth that careful reading of the scriptures in context, looking at the original languages, and studying the historical context are all that is required to solve most of them.

I’ve read your comment many times but your words are not clear to me, so I will do my best to tell you what I think you are trying to say and this should expose my error so you can correct me. It seems like you are saying that Thomas had an “ADDED blessing of believing based on facts” which modern Christians don’t have because we were not there to see Jesus in the flesh. I understand that just fine. But then you say that Christ’s statement “blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” does NOT mean “without evidence.” I don’t see where you got that from. You say it is because the “very next verse speaks of many convincing proofs.” That’s true, but what is the nature of the “proofs”? Do they give anyone any real l”evidence” or mere hearsay? Let’s see:

John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

It’s pure hearsay. The only “evidence” offered are things John wrote in a book. Now just to be clear, let me remind you of the definition: Hearsay is information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience.

Furthermore, this view of believing without any objective evidence coheres precisely with what Paul taught when he said that believers “walk by faith, not by sight.” And this is confirmed in Hebrews 11:1 which says faith is “the evidence of things not seen.” And I don’t think I am overstating things when I say that the vast majority of Christians have always understood that faith is something that cannot be proven with objective [scientific] evidence, and so no one has any choice but to believe “without evidence.”

As for Hugh Ross – he agrees that the earth is about 4.5 billions years old and the universe is about 13.7 billion years old. Google it.

And my point remains that I wouldn’t point out an extremist as a reason to leave trusting Jesus.

I did not “leave trusting Jesus” because of any human, “extremist” or not. I left the faith because I do not believe any of its many varieties is true. My point concerning the apologists is that they are good evidence of the falsehood of Christianity. If there are NO APOLOGISTS who can defend their faith with integrity despite 2000 years of trying, then I have good reason to suspect that the reason is that their faith is indefensible, and worse, that it tends to corrupt the minds and morals of believers *(which is the apotheosis of irony since their religion is supposed to be the source of all that is good and true).

I read the Bible daily. Again, I myself often see something of concern in the English, and then I check my own understanding with a little research. It is usually (99%) of the time resolved. I’ve had hour-long conversations with people who know the Bible as well as I do and there’s only one or two contradictions we are stuck on. I’m being honest in my reflections to you.

I have no reason to doubt your honesty, but I do have reason to believe your judgment is skewed because of many cognitive biases. I would be delighted to discuss the contradictions with you in more depth. An excellent place to start would be the post at the head of this comment stream. I exposed a lot of serious contradictions in the “fulfilled prophecies” claimed by Hugh Ross. You could choose to explain one of them if you feel so inclined.

Great chatting!

Richard

I agree with your first sentence in the scripture’s original languages. I also have cited where the Bible states that unstable minds find more problems in the Bible than solutions. We both know the main point of Babel is God’s dividing and conquering! How much more careful do we need to be when reading the Bible in English. There are 200 “good” versions of the English Bible, but to say all 200 are as God intended when we include errors of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and so forth strains credulity to me. (Just my opinion.)

*You assertion that you can resolve all the contradictions and errors in the Bible is so absurd as to sound delusional. I’ve been studying the Bible and apologetics for over two decades. I know what can and cannot be done, and that’s something that most certainly cannot be done. Just look at the utter absurdity spewed out by the leading Christian apologists. If they had real answers, why do they publish such rubbish?*

That’s my point. I usually don’t look at what leading apologists have done. Once I learned 1) one is supposed to be a “good workman” and study for one’s self 2) study historical context and culture to resolve some issues 3) most issues are verses pulled or strained from context — I was able to resolve the vast majority of issues on my own.

*It also is absurd to assert that “every verse of the Bible has remarkable encodings.” That simply is not true of anything like “every verse.” There are thousands of verses where we are not even sure what exact words or spellings belong because of textual variations. It doesn’t help when you overstate your case.*

Remarkably, the Bible codes exist, even where I believe we have copyist insertions or errors. Amazing! Have you heard, for example, of the larger characters written in the Esther verse about hanging Haman’s 10 sons, that total to 1946–1946 CE being when ten Nazis were hung at Nuremburg for crimes against the Jews… there are enough such examples to take note of… however, I want to remind us both that apologetics are not Bible codes but looking at scriptures carefully in context (mostly), remind you that is, until I ask how the Bible wheel works so well when men moved the canon order about from its chronological order–surely that is a good sign of men and God working in concert?!

The context of John 20:29 I’m sure you know; not being a doubting Thomas who had heard 11-plus eyewitnesses to the resurrection, the ADDED blessing of believing based on the facts without being a contemporary of Jesus (like most Christians), etc. It doesn’t mean without evidence. The very next verse speaks of many convincing proofs NEXT given during the pre-Pentecost period! When you write something of this caliber I’m a little surprised. You know context very well.

*That’s pretty funny because the age of the earth is one of the few things that Ross got right!*

I’m thinking he thinks it’s younger than you think, though. And my point remains that I wouldn’t point out an extremist as a reason to leave trusting Jesus. Your next point about all apologists doesn’t apply either. You can take me for an example. You said you found gaps in my logic. Do you find moral failings in me?

*To claim there are only “two contradictions” indicates a profound cognitive bias.*

I read the Bible daily. Again, I myself often see something of concern in the English, and then I check my own understanding with a little research. It is usually (99%) of the time resolved. I’ve had hour-long conversations with people who know the Bible as well as I do and there’s only one or two contradictions we are stuck on. I’m being honest in my reflections to you.

You said: The important point would be that he really is “God incarnate” whether or not anyone recognized him as such. And since he would be the Savior, anyone who was to be saved would be saved through him whether they explicitly knew him by name or not.

But not we have a new problem. It sounds like you are saying that “true Christianity” is nothing more than “being a good person.” What then is the Gospel? Can you tell me that? Who doesn’t get “saved” and why?
——————————
First of all I never said that being “good” would get you “saved”. Knowing the truth and showing real faith saving actions will get you saved! Let me explain….

“Two will be grinding at the mill one will be taken and the other left.” – These verses have nothing to do with the return of Christ or the “Secret rapture” as most “Christians belief”. This yin/yang passage is showing that the actions although the same (even sleeping) have very different outcomes as one person is saved and one is lost. And the saved one is the “left behind” one! If GOD takes you you ae dead dead! but let me regress…
The activites of the persons in question are the same! So that shows that the actions are not the deciding factor as to if you are “saved” or not. The Bible in the OT is clear as in the NT that “everything that is not of faith is sin.” “And sin IS the transgression of the law.” So that faith is the qualifier which is specific to the person and to the time. In Noah’s day the faith issue was not building the ark ut getting ON the ark. Everyone could have….only eight did.

In the the day of Jesus faith – saving faith was to accept Jesus as GOD Himself…. Not a single person did! But after His ressurection many believed on Him, and were “saved”. These stories tell us a very basic truth about faith. Faith is not exclusive to acertain people place or time. The Roman Centurion exhibited “more faith than all in Israel” according to Jesus. So that everyone is saved by faith in the truth as it is in Jesus the Word… aka GOD the Father’s Word – which jesus said, I do nothing except the Father tells me to do it!” I and my Father are one and the same”. This idea of GOD being different than Jesus has created all kinds of problems for theologians. The incarnation mystery is one which will never be explained. The Spirit is able to morph anything! Even GOD!

So the Gospel is not a new commandment but the old commandment which you have heard from the beginning… The Lord is one. The law of the Lord is forever settled in heaven. It is faith in the absolute Word of truth.that “saves”. “Thy Word is a light unto my path…” The words are spirit and they are life.”

Namaste,

Mystykal

I have answered your comment in a new post here.

All the best,

Richard

Thanks for your interesting comments. Your position does not seem too far removed from what I believed when I was a Christian. If one begins with the assumption that the Jesus is the Truth, then the demand that people have explicit knowledge of him is an upside down perspective. The important point would be that he really is “God incarnate” whether or not anyone recognized him as such. And since he would be the Savior, anyone who was to be saved would be saved through him whether they explicitly knew him by name or not.

But not we have a new problem. It sounds like you are saying that “true Christianity” is nothing more than “being a good person.” What then is the Gospel? Can you tell me that? Who doesn’t get “saved” and why?

Great chatting

Richard

Great little self interview there! Well articulated my friend! I would like to try and aswer your question you posed to Amber. “Which variety of Christianity do you believe in, and why?”

The question itself is somewhat self-defeating. First of all to assume that there are different “kinds” or “varieties” of Christians is illogical. Kind of like assuming that dogma or philosophy is what makes up the different colors of the rainbow!

So, if we narrow the definition of what a Christian is then we have taken a step in the right direction when identifing the term Christian.

Jesus according to the gospels said, “Not everyone who says Lord Lord, will enter into my kingdom – but only him who does the will of my Father!” And in another place it it said that Jesus said, “Many will say in that day ‘Lord! Lord! Didn’t we do these things in your name and in your name cast our deamons and performed mighty works?’ And I will turn to them and say, ‘Depart from me! You who do wickedly! I do not know you!”

Jesus said, “The words that I speak unto you – They are Spirit and they are life.”

So from these few verses we see that the term “Christian” could include people who do not officially recognize “Christianity” as the only Truth. So that a “true Christian” are only those who do and live the words of truth and life. A true “Christian” is like the “Good Samaritan” of the Christ parable! Not a “Jew” or a died in the wool, pew jumping speaking in tongues, Bible thumping “Christian”!

The idea that there is an ‘Absolute Truth” in life is the foundation on which all Scriptures are built. Jesus said, “When the Spirit of truth is come, it (he) will guide you into ALL truth.”

So on the day of Pentecost the Spirit was sent in its fullness. And the Spirit has been here ever since! The problem is that people have not allowed the Spirit to merge with their mind and illuminate their thinking. So we end up with the fake do gooders and wanna be’s running the churches and calling whatever brand of current belief “the truth”.

So what variety of Christianity do I believe in? The truth as it is IN Jesus the Supreme Word of Life known only by the enlightenment of the Spirit!

Namaste,

Mystykal