Answering some opposing views against Biblical Christianity
This is by no means a comprehensive list. David Lim is just filing some thoughts as answers to some critical thinking from sceptics/rational thinkers/errantists, as they are received via daily interaction.
===
A rational thinker is using the opposite fallacy, a fallacy of desirable consequences: an infallible interpreter of an infallible book will l) result in unity of doctrine. Since that is a desirable situation, then it must be true that there is an infallible interpreter of the Bible. However, just as wishful thinking cannot make a proposition false, it cannot make a proposition true either. Aside from this, it is obvious that the so-called infallible interpreter has not resulted in unity of doctrine even in the Catholic Church. Just because the RCC arbitrarily declares what is true doesn't not result in uniformity of acceptance among its membership.
David:
Nobody, not even the scriptures claimed that all people would believe in the same doctrine in our era, may it be from the bible or from other religions. Diversity of human thought is a well-known fact. We do not all think in the same way, or have brains of equal capacity/proportion.
The biblical christian church of God does not claim infallibility in interpreting scriptures. Also it does not claim that copies of scriptures with scribal mistakes are free from scribal error.
Desirable results/solutions according human ideals are not necessarily desirable to the Almighty God. God in scriptures has set His pattern to confound the wise of this world, and takes action that appear as foolishness to many philosophical principles.
A God whose action is predictable by human standard and philosophy is likely to be Anthropomorphic. The opposite would appear to be true; that a Being whose action and attributes are unreasonable by human standards is likely to be autonomous and not Anthropomorphic.
He is an entity outside our manipulation.
Therefore the predictable Being/God required by rational thinkers (for their belief and submission) as the true God is irrational to common human standard/reasoning, and an unreasonable model for a Being superior to mankind.The Roman Catholic Church is not given any authority to represent the true Church.
Scriptural principles are not followed to the dot. And extra-biblical doctrine(contrary to scriptural principles) are added from time to time.
Claiming authority from (down the line of) Peter, the RCC does not even follow the teachings of Peter as recorded in the Bible; and does not follow all the doctrine of Paul.
===
If even one person can find an inch of doubt in the passage, then there is confusion.
David: Anybody can raise doubt in whatsoever written, or transmitted.
Is 1+1=1 or 0 or 2 or something else?
Uncertainty can be raised from very simple things/statement; much more so when the issue/concept is profound and complicated.What is certainty when there is disagreement and confusion?
We know, certainty is when we do not bother to doubt anymore; when it is viable to our value system.Is there anything at all that is free from doubt, and therefore, free from confusion?
People are persuaded into believing things as facts. There is hardly any absolute knowledge (knowing all there is to know).
===
Occam's razor:
When a phenomenon needs explanation, the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.We tend to jump to the simpliest conclusion. However the simpliest and most obvious solution is not necessarily the right one. In design and computer language we come across - "KISS" - keep it simple smartie! This statement implies that things are not necessarily simple at the beginning, and we just strive to make them appear simple.
In Design - the simpliest solution is often a highly worked/permutated/revised solution.
What we come across mostly in our daily life is not necessarily the elements most likely to resemble the event we are facing. New approaches are required to meet daily challenge.
People/tribesmen in inland Africa are not likely to have seen whales and sea-monsters capable of swallowing men. Yet we who live next to the ocean know that such giantic animals do exist. The simpliest conclusion of these tribesmen that fishes are no bigger that palm size is wrong, when we look further and harder from the obvious daily experience. A spirit of exploration/adventure is required.Occam's razor expressed that the simplest explanation is probably the correct one. The term probably suggests that it is not a certainty (a law). So we should not apply it with the assemption that the simplest explanation is the correct one.
It also offers no proof. We still need to test the situation/event/proposal and seek for other possibilities and explanation. A closed mind cripples discovery.
===
Thomas Paine said in *Age of Reason* one would have to believe that the emperor Vespasian healed a blind man and a lame man as Tacitus said. (Paine said Tacitus, but actually this alleged event was recorded by Suetonius.)
Thomas Paine is not free from mistake. He is not the authority in the Age of Reason.
We see here that ancient/classical historians recorded hearsay events in their records. It is hard to prove actual occurance of the recorded events. However, we tend to have more faith in historical records that books of myths and legends. Hardly anybody regarded Julius Caesar or the founding of Rome as myths.
A human being can possess healing power. A doctor can heal by medicine. A witch doctor can heal by drugs. A magician can heal by magic or even by psycho-manipulation.
It is a dismissive faith in the sceptic that cuts out possible investigation and solution to a event/allegation. Afterall, the sceptic was not there to witness and testify the event truly did not happen.
Miracles of non-believers are recorded in the Bible (eg: Pharaoh's magicians in Exodus turned their staffs into snakes) as well as experienced by magicians/spiritualists.
It is un-biblical to deny miracles/ miraculous events/spiritual powers ( eg: medium, devination and demon-possession recorded in the Bible ) outside the communities of christians(believers of God).
===
Josephus claimed in "Wars of the Jews," 6:5.3 that the people of Jerusalem had seen soldiers and chariots in the clouds surrounding the city.
Josephus, being a classical historian, need not subscribe to the school of naturalists.
Historians should record details as told and express opinion later, rather than blotting out improbable material from the very beginning. Conclusion should not be made from just the most probable scenario while ignoring all other possibilities.
It is for researchers to discover whether halucinating drugs were used to induce that experience; or some told a lie; or words got changed in transmission; or it really happened that way. This is the spirit of -"keeping an open mind".
Early christians are accused to have tempered with the record of Jesus in the writing of Josephus, without any factual evidence from his text.
Josephus can record hearsay evidence no matter how ridiculous they appeared to be. It does not naturally mean somebody has tempered with his text.
===
Josephus reported that a heifer being led to the altar had given birth to a lamb.
So he reported. He did not express any doubt in this event?
It appears that Josephus was willing to record strange details without fear of ridicule.
Is Philosophy not a subject of reasoning; and Philosophers, are they not capable of rational reasoning?
These classical historians would have known Greek Philosophy as well. They are not merely pro-supernaturalists who can not be rational.The Age of Reason started with Natural Science and the Industrial Revolution. But Science was still under the subject of Philosophy until after Rusell.
Is it not natural to reason that there existed deities and spiritual forces, as so many philosophers did? To the people of bible times, miracles are trustworthy events if the simpliest solution is probably the correct one.Science and technology did not start with 19th century Western Scientists. They existed and were studied in ancient China, when the pyramids were built, and at the time of King Solomon; in times when magic and miracles and divination are also trustworthy subjects of daily life.
===
the claim of Suetonius, recorded in *The Twelve Caesars* that while Roman officials were arguing over where to cremate the body of Julius Caesar, two divine forms came down with torches and set fire to Caesar's pyre.
No evidence to dismiss that narrative as false, far-fetched, and mythical.
Suetonius might be engineering a myth that Caesar is indeed divine.
A god that can be murdered without fore-knowledge did not appeared to be mightier than men.
===
I have never seen an occurrence that could not be explained by natural means. I have never seen anyone demonstrate that miracles can happen.
How about cancer disappearing from petients of terminal illness, even doctors could not explain why.
When doctors, with their scientific, rational training, failed to explain the healing by natural means, non-believers are claiming that miracles (supernatural events) are definitely impossible and can be explained away.
Nobody claimed that miracles are for demonstration at any chosen time and place. To demand such demonstration is to be non-sensible, ridiculous and unscientific (choosing experiment not suitable for the matter under investigation, and not devising suitable, adequate experiment).
There are control experiment in social science we cannot set up. So without such control experiment we are depending on theories and belief rather than on hard facts.
Who would like to prove models of social science with experiment of pure science and natural science? Who would prove theories of theoretical science with experiments of pure science? Yet these professing rational thinkers/sceptics require such proof for religion and the biblical faith (which are not in the realm of pure science). Reasonable? Or just irrational? What are their hidden agenda?
There are many things far greater than what can be humanly controlled. Many things existed without adequate scientific explanation. (eg: the cause of all cancers and disease, alignment of stone henge, statutes on Easter Island, telepathy) Yet it is stupidity to believe they do not exist. (eg: sickness, affection, the making of stone coffin in the pyramid of Gizza, Chi Kung, acupuncture)
===
----
...
Answering errancy allegation ||
Copying produce mistakes ? || Examining jewish geneaology from Exodus ||
Examining jewish geneaology from Ezra || Answering some opposition ||
Preaching one thing and doing another || Witness of a Christian layman (1) ||
Baptism by Immersion? || Preservation of Christian Doctrines ||
The lowly and the far-reaching || Just War and Love || Did Jesus speak only Aramaic? ||
A Failed Prophesy on Tyre? || Another Failed Prophesy on Tyre? ||
Why 4 Gospels? || Answering Errancy Allegation ||
Hebrew Matthew and document Q || Census in Luke Ch 2 ( Anachronism? ) ||
A Christian Witness || Marrying non-believer ||
Similarity warrants Recognition and Unity? || Freewill and pre-destination ||
Dynamic Equivalence and Propitiation ||
Photography || Photo Gallery || Portrait Gallery || Architecture ||
Design Consultancy || Preacher || Herbalist || Cool Sites ||
News ||