Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

What Christianity Hinges On

I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 2:31:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Christianity hinges on the fact the Christianity is in fact a separate religion from Judaism, and that it is divinely inspired from the same God. Take away either one, and it's a baseless cult really.

Now, the bible in reality, if it took in all account, would be a lot larger. However, a meeting of the early Christian church at the town of Hippo sifted through the documents and picked out the most appropriate ones, which would evolve to become Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Now, if the council of Hippo was not in fact divinely inspired, then the Bible is not the true word of God, and therefore Christianity crumbles.

Thoughts, and can anyone provide me with further info. on this?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 2:49:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
It's a fair, if simple argument, though I'm referring to the latter one, obviously, because the Judaism thing is pretty much a moot point (Christianity is essentially Judaism, just post-Messiah).

You could easily add in the Nicaea councils, the various other scrolls and books (I mean, if its so divinely inspired, why is there so much interpretation?), and it would all work out in you favour.

Now, whether Christianity "hinges" on this blind faith, is another story. Most Christians don't believe the Bible is a literal book, and those that do believe it is a literal book simply won't listen to you. It's kind of funny, actually.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:21:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 2:31:42 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Christianity hinges on the fact the Christianity is in fact a separate religion from Judaism, and that it is divinely inspired from the same God. Take away either one, and it's a baseless cult really.


Actually Christ never intended to start a new religion, Christians are Jews or have no religion at all.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
BruteApologia
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 12:14:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Now, the bible in reality, if it took in all account, would be a lot larger. However, a meeting of the early Christian church at the town of Hippo sifted through the documents and picked out the most appropriate ones, which would evolve to become Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Now, if the council of Hippo was not in fact divinely inspired, then the Bible is not the true word of God, and therefore Christianity crumbles.


This assumes that the only means of knowing whether the Bible is truly the word of God is through divine inspiration. Unlike the recently popular conception, the council was not simply an official group of religious leaders who had a list of books to consider for a biblical canon. The process was far more rigorous than that. It included historical, textual, sociological, and other means for determining divine inspiration. You'll need to demonstrate these methods as being insufficient in order to have a convincing argument.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 3:06:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 12:14:58 AM, BruteApologia wrote:
Now, the bible in reality, if it took in all account, would be a lot larger. However, a meeting of the early Christian church at the town of Hippo sifted through the documents and picked out the most appropriate ones, which would evolve to become Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Now, if the council of Hippo was not in fact divinely inspired, then the Bible is not the true word of God, and therefore Christianity crumbles.


This assumes that the only means of knowing whether the Bible is truly the word of God is through divine inspiration. Unlike the recently popular conception, the council was not simply an official group of religious leaders who had a list of books to consider for a biblical canon. The process was far more rigorous than that. It included historical, textual, sociological, and other means for determining divine inspiration. You'll need to demonstrate these methods as being insufficient in order to have a convincing argument.

Err....you can verify divine inspiration?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 3:24:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 3:06:17 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/6/2010 12:14:58 AM, BruteApologia wrote:
It included historical, textual, sociological, and other means for determining divine inspiration. You'll need to demonstrate these methods as being insufficient in order to have a convincing argument.

Err....you can verify divine inspiration?

Yes, I'd like to hear this. How do you demonstrate divine inspiration using historical, textual and sociological tools?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 1:36:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 2:49:20 PM, Volkov wrote:
It's a fair, if simple argument, though I'm referring to the latter one, obviously, because the Judaism thing is pretty much a moot point (Christianity is essentially Judaism, just post-Messiah).

You could easily add in the Nicaea councils, the various other scrolls and books (I mean, if its so divinely inspired, why is there so much interpretation?), and it would all work out in you favour.

: Now, whether Christianity "hinges" on this blind faith, is another story. Most Christians don't believe the Bible is a literal book, and those that do believe it is a literal book simply won't listen to you. It's kind of funny, actually.

If a Christian doesn't believe it's literal, is it blind faith? I certainly think i know what faith is, but would be interested in knowing what parameters "blind faith" have. If there is something called "proof" it no longer is faith yes? Faith is a strong belief in something...what is blind faith and how does it differ from other faith?
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 1:42:58 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 1:36:04 PM, innomen wrote:
If a Christian doesn't believe it's literal, is it blind faith? I certainly think i know what faith is, but would be interested in knowing what parameters "blind faith" have. If there is something called "proof" it no longer is faith yes? Faith is a strong belief in something...what is blind faith and how does it differ from other faith?

I could only give you a subjective definition for it, but I consider "blind faith" which is pretty much akin to "ignorance" or "stubbornness." It entails having faith in something, no matter what challenges it, even if the proof is overwhelming. Kinda like how a blind person has to try and stretch their imagination to know what the world looks like, even though they never can, and even though they might be wrong.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 1:56:30 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 1:42:58 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/6/2010 1:36:04 PM, innomen wrote:
If a Christian doesn't believe it's literal, is it blind faith? I certainly think i know what faith is, but would be interested in knowing what parameters "blind faith" have. If there is something called "proof" it no longer is faith yes? Faith is a strong belief in something...what is blind faith and how does it differ from other faith?

I could only give you a subjective definition for it, but I consider "blind faith" which is pretty much akin to "ignorance" or "stubbornness." It entails having faith in something, no matter what challenges it, even if the proof is overwhelming. Kinda like how a blind person has to try and stretch their imagination to know what the world looks like, even though they never can, and even though they might be wrong.

Now i would have thought it the other way around. Those who believe the bible to be literal look at miracles as proof and have substance to back up what they believe, and are not blind, but fully guided in their faith by, what they see as facts; whereas those who look at it more metaphorically are believing in something without such data to support their faith. Ignorance is a lack of knowledge, and in the case of someone who is a literalist, it is lack of accepting facts to the contrary of what they hold to be true.
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 1:58:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
"Blind faith" sounds like a redundant phrase to me.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
nickthengineer
Posts: 251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 3:01:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 2:31:42 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Christianity hinges on the fact the Christianity is in fact a separate religion from Judaism, and that it is divinely inspired from the same God. Take away either one, and it's a baseless cult really.

Now, the bible in reality, if it took in all account, would be a lot larger. However, a meeting of the early Christian church at the town of Hippo sifted through the documents and picked out the most appropriate ones, which would evolve to become Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Now, if the council of Hippo was not in fact divinely inspired, then the Bible is not the true word of God, and therefore Christianity crumbles.

Thoughts, and can anyone provide me with further info. on this?

My understanding is that certain letters were circulating between different churches and were considered Scripture already, and after a while (whether or not this was the council of Hippo or something else, I don't know) the church leaders got together to collect copies of these letters (most of them written by Paul) together and make more copies of them so that they could be shared with more people. But before this, around AD 67, everything Paul had written was already considered Scripture by at least Peter (2 Peter 3:15,16) and therefore probably many others, so take that for what it's worth.
I evolved from stupid. (http://www.debate.org...)
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2010 3:49:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 2:31:42 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Christianity hinges on the fact the Christianity is in fact a separate religion from Judaism, and that it is divinely inspired from the same God. Take away either one, and it's a baseless cult really.

Now, the bible in reality, if it took in all account, would be a lot larger. However, a meeting of the early Christian church at the town of Hippo sifted through the documents and picked out the most appropriate ones, which would evolve to become Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Now, if the council of Hippo was not in fact divinely inspired, then the Bible is not the true word of God, and therefore Christianity crumbles.

Thoughts, and can anyone provide me with further info. on this?

Yes IF they were not divinely inspired.. but IF they were?
The Cross.. the Cross.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2010 4:05:32 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/7/2010 3:49:57 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 6/5/2010 2:31:42 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Christianity hinges on the fact the Christianity is in fact a separate religion from Judaism, and that it is divinely inspired from the same God. Take away either one, and it's a baseless cult really.

Now, the bible in reality, if it took in all account, would be a lot larger. However, a meeting of the early Christian church at the town of Hippo sifted through the documents and picked out the most appropriate ones, which would evolve to become Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Now, if the council of Hippo was not in fact divinely inspired, then the Bible is not the true word of God, and therefore Christianity crumbles.

Thoughts, and can anyone provide me with further info. on this?

Yes IF they were not divinely inspired.. but IF they were?

Got proof? Oh wait, your faith requires you to believe without proof, and most times in the face of evidence and proof.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2010 2:23:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/7/2010 4:05:32 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/7/2010 3:49:57 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 6/5/2010 2:31:42 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Christianity hinges on the fact the Christianity is in fact a separate religion from Judaism, and that it is divinely inspired from the same God. Take away either one, and it's a baseless cult really.

Now, the bible in reality, if it took in all account, would be a lot larger. However, a meeting of the early Christian church at the town of Hippo sifted through the documents and picked out the most appropriate ones, which would evolve to become Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Now, if the council of Hippo was not in fact divinely inspired, then the Bible is not the true word of God, and therefore Christianity crumbles.

Thoughts, and can anyone provide me with further info. on this?

Yes IF they were not divinely inspired.. but IF they were?

Got proof? Oh wait, your faith requires you to believe without proof, and most times in the face of evidence and proof.

Got proof that it is not devinely inspired? oh wait, atheism is a religion that requires zero proof also..
The Cross.. the Cross.