Does your faith depend on physical evidences?

[Libby]

Was looking through articles on "evidence for Jesus" and came across a statement from a couple of Christians, stating there faith did not rest upon physical evidence. I was happy to see a Christian admit that, because I know, deep down that most EV Christians really do feel that way, but, for some reason, on these boards, they do not allow that for other faiths, like Mormonism. There is all of this talk about physical evidence, as though that is going to prove anything, in regards to faith and the spiritual realm...speaking of it, as though it were THE most important thing.

So, it's nice to know that there are some who don't need physical evidence or will even keep their faith, despite lack of physical evidence. If your knowledge is from God (the Spirit), that's as it should be.

Archeological evidence of Jesus doesn't quell faith for believers (http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2008/09/26/existence-archeological-evidence-jesus-doesnt-quell-faith-believers/)

[Libby]

Excerpts from the above link:


Pat Kraff and Nancy Mebed came to the lecture because of an interest in the relationship between science and religion. They said their faith was not in question, regardless of what the archaeology revealed.

"I don't depend on historical evidence for my belief," Kraff said.


Galor said the accuracy of Helena's site cannot be archaeologically or historically verified.

"We haven't uncovered any archaeological evidence for Jesus individually, and there is not much hope that we ever will," she said.


Christina Cunningham, who attended the lecture, rephrased Galor's summary. When asked about the lecture's relationship to her religion, she quoted the well-known saying of faith, which must, it appears, satisfy the scientific quest for physical evidence of Jesus' existence: "If you have faith, no evidence is necessary. If you lack faith, no evidence is sufficient."

That last statement says it all.

[Billyray]

Does your faith depend on physical evidences?

Faith in Christ is based on the fact that Christ really did exist on the earth and did the things that he said he did. Do we have physical evidence thar Christ really existed? Absolutely. We have independent eye witness testimonies of this fact.

This type of evidence is completely lacking for the book of mormon which tells me that this book is made up by Joseph and can't be trusted.

[Libby]

Faith in Christ is based on the fact that Christ really did exist on the earth and did the things that he said he did. Do we have physical evidence thar Christ really existed? Absolutely. We have independent eye witness testimonies of this fact.

This type of evidence is completely lacking for the book of mormon which tells me that this book is made up by Joseph and can't be trusted.

Well, that's not true. There were 11 witnesses that claim the Book of Mormon came from a Divine source, just as Joseph claimed. They held the plates, felt them with their hands, saw them and examined them, along with artifacts from the book.

If eyewitness accounts are going to come into play, then they have to be accepted for both Jesus and the Book of Mormon....or neither.

[Apologette]

Was looking through articles on "evidence for Jesus" and came across a statement from a couple of Christians, stating there faith did not rest upon physical evidence. I was happy to see a Christian admit that, because I know, deep down that most EV Christians really do feel that way, but, for some reason, on these boards, they do not allow that for other faiths, like Mormonism. There is all of this talk about physical evidence, as though that is going to prove anything, in regards to faith and the spiritual realm...speaking of it, as though it were THE most important thing.

So, it's nice to know that there are some who don't need physical evidence or will even keep their faith, despite lack of physical evidence. If your knowledge is from God (the Spirit), that's as it should be.

Archeological evidence of Jesus doesn't quell faith for believers (http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2008/09/26/existence-archeological-evidence-jesus-doesnt-quell-faith-believers/)

Well, if all we had to go on was somebody of highly questionable character who was a serial adulterer, tell us that there was some man named Mormi living on planet Kiola, and that Mormi had lived a perfect life and was executed by the criminal Kiolians, and that his execution now provided eternal life to whoever believed in Mormi; and that believers in Mormi could live eternally on planet Kiola with him, would I believe it? No, because there is no known planet called Kiola, nor any verificiation that there is a Kiolian race of people inhabiting that planet, or that Mormi is any more than the figment of some writer's imangination. Not to mention the fact that the story was invented by someone who had a craving for his neighbors' wives (that would be plural). In other word, a piece of fiction without one shred of evidence.

I don't care what some Christians say, because they are ****ing smoke if they tell you that if there was no evidence for Chrisitianity at all that they'd still have faith. If there was no Israel, no Roman Empire, no manner of execution called crucifixion, and no eyewitnesses to the life of Christ (see the Gospels which are eyewitness accounts), what would make Christianity any different from, for instance, Kolianism? Or, Hare Krishna mythology? Blind faith is not faith at all, it's no more than mindless submission to whatever story happens to make you feel good.

You can bet your life that if some Christian archaeologists were searching for a lifetime (as Mormons have done regarding the BoM) to uncover evidence for the existence of Jerusalem, and found absolutely nothing, they wouldn't be so quick to make such a claim. Mormon archaeologists who have spent their lifetimes in endless quests to prove the Book of Mormon, and been disappointed, have even stated that there is no BoM archaeology. Because Mormonism demands blind, unfounded faith in a myth made up by the Rigdon/Smith/Cowdery cabal, Mormons want to transfer their terrible dilemma to Chrsitianity. Won't work - we have plenty of archaeological proof and eyewitness accounts to back up every narrative in the Bible - and some angel hasn't swooped down and grabbed the evidence away for transportation to some non-existent star called Kolob which provides all the sun's light, so that Quakers can live there!

People really need to think things through before committing their own salvation and those of family members to a belief system that is a hoax.

"Some Mormon scholars are beginning to publicly admit that archaeology does not furnish any significant evidence for the Book of Mormon. Dee F. Green, who at one time served as editor of the University Archaeological Society Newsletter, published at the church’s Brigham Young University, made it plain that archaeological evidence did not prove the Book of Mormon: "The first myth we need to eliminate is that Book of Mormon archaeology exists…. If one is to study Book of Mormon archaeology, then one must have a corpus of data with which to deal. We do not. The Book of Mormon is really there so one can have Book of Mormon studies, and archaeology is really there so one can study archaeology, but the two are not wed. At least they are not wed in reality since no Book of Mormon location is known with reference to modern topography. Biblical archaeology can be studied because we do know where Jerusalem and Jericho were and are, but we do not know where Zarahemla and Bountiful (nor any other location for that matter) were or are. It would seem then that a concentration on geography should be the first order of business, but we have already seen that twenty years of such an approach has left us empty-handed." (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer 1969, pp. 77-78)" ( from: http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/testingthebookofmormon.htm)

[Billyray]

If eyewitness accounts are going to come into play, then they have to be accepted for both Jesus and the Book of Mormon....or neither.

There is no evidence that predates Joseph. Show me any ancient writing that verifies the Nephites ever exited in the Americas.

[Apologette]

Well, that's not true. There were 11 witnesses that claim the Book of Mormon came from a Divine source, just as Joseph claimed. They held the plates, felt them with their hands, saw them and examined them, along with artifacts from the book.

If eyewitness accounts are going to come into play, then they have to be accepted for both Jesus and the Book of Mormon....or neither.

Oh, so if all these "witnesses" came from a "divine source," how come the divine source was so messed up that most of these "witnesses" (outside of the Smith family members), were excommunicated from the cult?

http://www.irr.org/mit/bom-wit-pt1.html

I think you need to make a more thorough study of Mormonism - something I think you failed to do when you first left the group. I remember a time when you seemed to have embraced Christ and the Gospel of Salvation through His shed Blood, Libby. You don't need "plates" and "witnesses" and "myths," cleverly invented to mislead people. You need the Living God Who was Incarnate in Christ Jesus. Only He can save you. If you have the wrong Jesus (some created being who is the spirit brother of Lucifer), you have rejected the One Who says, "Come unto me all you who labor, and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." There is no rest in Mormoism, only an endless quest to perform enough works, fulfill enough callings, get baptized for dead people enough times, and give enough money, in order to earn a chance at being in some Celestial Kingdom.

Jesus or Mormonism? That is the choice. Christians don't want to lead you to a particular "true" denomination - they want to lead you to a relationship. That is the difference between Mormonism and Christianity. Mormonism is all about "the true and living church," the LDS. Christianity is about proclaiming Jesus Christ, Who He is, and what He has done for us.

[Apologette]

Was looking through articles on "evidence for Jesus" and came across a statement from a couple of Christians, stating there faith did not rest upon physical evidence. I was happy to see a Christian admit that, because I know, deep down that most EV Christians really do feel that way, but, for some reason, on these boards, they do not allow that for other faiths, like Mormonism. There is all of this talk about physical evidence, as though that is going to prove anything, in regards to faith and the spiritual realm...speaking of it, as though it were THE most important thing.

So, it's nice to know that there are some who don't need physical evidence or will even keep their faith, despite lack of physical evidence. If your knowledge is from God (the Spirit), that's as it should be.

Archeological evidence of Jesus doesn't quell faith for believers (http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2008/09/26/existence-archeological-evidence-jesus-doesnt-quell-faith-believers/)


"It is a painful fact of life, though, that sincerity is not a guarantee against being wrong. Most of us know sincere people who have been sincerely wrong. Faith must have some basis in fact."

[RealFakeHair]

"It is a painful fact of life, though, that sincerity is not a guarantee against being wrong. Most of us know sincere people who have been sincerely wrong. Faith must have some basis in fact."

Having never been wrong about anything in my life, and having faith of a sincere pretender of everything I stand for, and sometimes as often believe in, I can say without a doubt (faith doesn't need facts, and that is a fact.)
All faith needs is carrier.:confused:

[Apologette]

Having never been wrong about anything in my life, and having faith of a sincere pretender of everything I stand for, and sometimes as often believe in, I can say without a doubt (faith doesn't need facts, and that is a fact.)
All faith needs is carrier.:confused:

Would you care to rephrase that? I don't know what you're trying to say.

[Libby]

There is no evidence that predates Joseph. Show me any ancient writing that verifies the Nephites ever exited in the Americas.

Show me solid, irrefutable physical evidence, from non-Christian sources, that Jesus ever existed, and then we'll talk about Nephite evidence, from non-Mormon sources.

[Libby]

"It is a painful fact of life, though, that sincerity is not a guarantee against being wrong. Most of us know sincere people who have been sincerely wrong. Faith must have some basis in fact."

Who are you quoting?

It's nice to have physical evidence, but most certainly the lack of it, does not prove what you believe is wrong. Millions of people believe Jesus actually existed, even though there is nothing, in the way of physical evidence, to prove it.

[Libby]

Oh, so if all these "witnesses" came from a "divine source," how come the divine source was so messed up that most of these "witnesses" (outside of the Smith family members), were excommunicated from the cult?

http://www.irr.org/mit/bom-wit-pt1.html

I think you need to make a more thorough study of Mormonism - something I think you failed to do when you first left the group. I remember a time when you seemed to have embraced Christ and the Gospel of Salvation through His shed Blood, Libby. You don't need "plates" and "witnesses" and "myths," cleverly invented to mislead people. You need the Living God Who was Incarnate in Christ Jesus. Only He can save you. If you have the wrong Jesus (some created being who is the spirit brother of Lucifer), you have rejected the One Who says, "Come unto me all you who labor, and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." There is no rest in Mormoism, only an endless quest to perform enough works, fulfill enough callings, get baptized for dead people enough times, and give enough money, in order to earn a chance at being in some Celestial Kingdom.

Jesus or Mormonism? That is the choice. Christians don't want to lead you to a particular "true" denomination - they want to lead you to a relationship. That is the difference between Mormonism and Christianity. Mormonism is all about "the true and living church," the LDS. Christianity is about proclaiming Jesus Christ, Who He is, and what He has done for us.

Only three of the witnesses were excommunicated and two of them returned...none of them ever recanted their testimony.

As for religious choices, we have many, not just two.

Gotta run, for now.

[Apologette]

Show me solid, irrefutable physical evidence, from non-Christian sources, that Jesus ever existed, and then we'll talk about Nephite evidence, from non-Mormon sources.

Okay, so you doubt the existence of Christ? Even solid atheists don't doubt that Christ existed. You really don't know what you're talking about Libby. The fact of Christ's existence was established long ago. I mean, Libby, common sense should tell you that Paul, writing perhaps 30 years or less after the Ascension, is proof positive that Christ existed. He wrote to people who would have known if Christ was an actual person or a myth. The Jews weren't fools you know. Paul established the authenticity of his account when he appealed to the fact that many who were still living were witnesses of Christ's resurrection! Do you think Paul didn't exist?

Paul wrote: "He(Jesus) was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep." 1 Cor 15.4-6

Don't you think the persons living at that time would have booed Paul out of town if he was lying? No, he was a great Apostle, and nobody (not even the Jews) accused him of lying about the existence of Jesus. They simply attacked him for believing that Christ was Who he said He was, the Son of God.

I suggest you read Strobel's book or at least watch the DVD:

http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/cms_content?page=715617&sp=72595&kw=the%20case%20for%20christ&event=PPCSRC&p=1018818&cm_mmc=Google-_-Authors-_-lee%20strobel-_-the%20case%20for%20christ&gclid=CJmOh-qh6a4CFQaFhwodCxeviQ

This deals with the evidence of Christ's existence. I doubt you'd deny the existence of Ceasar Augustus or Nero, right? Why do you deny, or even question, Christ's existence? There are four eyewitness Gospels written about his life. Luke says he carefully researched everything. He lived while Mary was still alive.

Don't close your heart to Christ - He did exist, and if what He said is true, then you need to decide what you, Libby, believe about Him.

[jdjhere]

Libby- do you or don't you agree that it is MUCH more difficult to find archeological physical proof of the existence of ONE man than it is to find archeological physical proof for the existence of an entire race or group of people that made things and were in a great war? Even with THAT being said, we still have a few-Jesus Christ is at least MENTIONED in other books other than the Bible, whether they are subject to question or not, which is at least SOME evidence that He existed. Can you give us ANY other evidences for the existence of Nephites other than the BOM or other LDS literature? I understand what you are saying about Spiritual evidences, but we as Evangelicals have Spiritual experiences as well and can say the same thing, so we negate each other on that point. That would leave us with OTHER evidences for proof. Are there any for Nephites? Thanks.

[Apologette]

Libby- do you or don't you agree that it is MUCH more difficult to find archeological physical proof of the existence of ONE man than it is to find archeological physical proof for the existence of an entire race or group of people that made things and were in a great war? Even with THAT being said, we still have a few-Jesus Christ is at least MENTIONED in other books other than the Bible, whether they are subject to question or not, which is at least SOME evidence that He existed. Can you give us ANY other evidences for the existence of Nephites other than the BOM or other LDS literature? I understand what you are saying about Spiritual evidences, but we as Evangelicals have Spiritual experiences as well and can say the same thing, so we negate each other on that point. That would leave us with OTHER evidences for proof. Are there any for Nephites? Thanks.

Even the Jews mention Jesus as the illegitimate spawn of Mary, the hairdresser, in the Babylonian Talmud.

[jdjhere]

Libby is defending something she does not believe herself (I think?? Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, Libby) but she is just trying to make a point. From the way she vigorously defends the LDS beliefs, I believe she still has one foot in the door of the LDS church, I think, but if you take away ANY historically verifiable REAL PERSON Jesus then the LDS faith falls apart as well. That would mean He NEVER came here to preach to the Native American Indians and therefore, LDS theology is moot.

The problem I am having is that, in my opinion, she is comparing the Needle TO the Haystack, the Needle being Jesus Christ and the Haystack being the Nephite People, Civilization and their great war where close to a million of them were killed.

Let's look at Jesus- It is a KNOWN absolute FACT that Jews exist, and Jesus was said to be a Jew. There ARE books OUTSIDE Christianity that MENTION Him, THUS evidence that He existed. Archeologically the Bible is a very good tool, with all cities accounted for and coins, tools, etc, found for emperors of the time, etc. There are multiple-millions of believers in Christ, thus also Spiritual Evidence that He existed.

Now, let's look at Nephi- no other historical writings OUTSIDE the LDS BOM and other literature mentions Nephi of the Nephites, nothing found physically or archeologically to confirm the existence of an ancient people called Nephites, Nephi or any OTHER main characters in the BOM are mentioned nowhere BUT LDS literature, but millions believe in Christ, thus Spiritual Evidence that He existed.

That is the evidence to date Libby. If you would like to add the best physical or archeological finds to strengthen your case, be my guest.

[Libby]

Libby is defending something she does not believe herself (I think?? Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, Libby) but she is just trying to make a point. From the way she vigorously defends the LDS beliefs, I believe she still has one foot in the door of the LDS church, I think, but if you take away ANY historically verifiable REAL PERSON Jesus then the LDS faith falls apart as well. That would mean He NEVER came here to preach to the Native American Indians and therefore, LDS theology is moot.

The problem I am having is that, in my opinion, she is comparing the Needle TO the Haystack, the Needle being Jesus Christ and the Haystack being the Nephite People, Civilization and their great war where clode to a million of them were killed.

Let's look at Jesus- It is a KNOWN absolute FACT that Jews exist, and Jesus was said to be a Jew. There ARE books OUTSIDE Christianity that MENTION Him, THUS evidence that He existed. Archeologically the Bible is a very good tool, with all cities accounted for and coins, tools, etc, found for emperors of the time, etc. There are multiple-millions of believers in Christ, thus also Spiritual Evidence that He existed.

Now, let's look at Nephi- no other historical writings OUTSIDE the LDS BOM and other literature mentions Nephi of the Nephites, nothing found physically or archeologically to confirm the existence of an ancient people called Nephites, Nephi or any OTHER main characters in the BOM are mentioned nowhere BUT LDS literature, but millions believe in Christ, thus Spiritual Evidence that He existed.

That is the evidence to date Libby. If you would like to add the best physical or archeological finds to strengthen your case, be my guest.

You have it right, Jd. I don't think most religious people base their faith on physical evidence. If they did, they wouldn't have it very long, after reading a lot of non-religious/non-biased biblical scholars, many of whom take the same stance against the Bible/Jesus, etc, as some "Christians" do against LDS. Some people actually do lose their Christian faith, after studying the facts.

There is not much in the way of "physical" evidence, for Book of Mormon peoples, Jd, but there is "some". You will find it in Jeff Lindsay (and other's) writings that I have linked, a couple of times.

(I am not LDS, nor do I plan on returning - I am a Hindu-Christian, but I do think the LDS have "some" things right)

[RealFakeHair]

You have it right, Jd. I don't think most religious people base their faith on physical evidence. If they did, they wouldn't have it very long, after reading a lot of non-religious/non-biased biblical scholars, many of whom take the same stance against the Bible/Jesus, etc, as some "Christians" do against LDS. Some people actually do lose their Christian faith, after studying the facts.

There is not much in the way of "physical" evidence, for Book of Mormon peoples, Jd, but there is "some". You will find it in Jeff Lindsay (and other's) writings that I have linked, a couple of times.

There is none, nope not even a little, little bit.
I like Jeff Lindsay's determnation in failer, he works so hard at it.
I can't blame you or Jeff for wanting to believe in something, anything that might validate the novel Book of Mormon.
It's kinda like Harry Potter, wouldn't be nice it Hogwarts was a real place, oh but wait, it is, somewhere in the middle of Florida!;)

[Libby]

Well, you are simply wrong. No surprise there. ;)

I don't need physical evidence to tell me what is true. Neither do I need for Mormonism to be true (some of it is, some, not so much). I am not a practicing Mormon.

[RealFakeHair]

Well, you are simply wrong. No surprise there. ;)

I don't need physical evidence to tell me what is true. Neither do I need for Mormonism to be true (some of it is, some, not so much). I am not a practicing Mormon.

It's okay I am simple, but never wrong. I was born that way, but I do keep trying to be wrong, but it goes against my nature.

[Libby]

It's okay I am simple, but never wrong. I was born that way, but I do keep trying to be wrong, but it goes against my nature.

lol...you make me smile. Not a bad thing. :)

[Apologette]

Only three of the witnesses were excommunicated and two of them returned...none of them ever recanted their testimony.

As for religious choices, we have many, not just two.

Gotta run, for now.

There testimony was that they saw the plates with the "eye" of faith. Come on, you doubt the Gospel but buy into Martin Harris, for instance, who said he had a greater testimony of Shakerism than the BoM? Or, David Whitmer who basically said Smith was a false prophet; or Cowdery who became a Methodist?

[Apologette]

Well, you are simply wrong. No surprise there. ;)

I don't need physical evidence to tell me what is true. Neither do I need for Mormonism to be true (some of it is, some, not so much). I am not a practicing Mormon.

You might not practice it, but do you believe it?

[Libby]

There testimony was that they saw the plates with the "eye" of faith. Come on, you doubt the Gospel but buy into Martin Harris, for instance, who said he had a greater testimony of Shakerism than the BoM? Or, David Whitmer who basically said Smith was a false prophet; or Cowdery who became a Methodist?

I think you meant "their" testimony, although, I'm not sure who you are talking about. I think, it was David Whitmer who said that, and he did not mean it the way you are interpreting it.

All but one of the three witnesses returned to the church. And, all of them, without exception, maintained a very solid testimony all of their lives.

[Libby]

You might not practice it, but do you believe it?

As I said above, some of it is true, some of it, I do not believe...which is why I am no longer a practicing Mormon. A lot of what I don't believe has more to do with my rejection of conservative/fundamentalist Christianity, than with Mormonism, per se. I see more truth in Mormonism than in Calvinism (for example), but I think both of these Christian views have a fairly distorted view of Christ and who he really was.

[jdjhere]

Libby stated: "I am not LDS, nor do I plan on returning - I am a Hindu-Christian, but I do think the LDS have "some" things right>"

I actually AGREE with that Libby, the LDS DO INDEED have "some" things right-trying to live a good clean life, trying their best to love people, very friend and family oriented, very moral... these are ALL the right things to do and I am FOR them in that area. Here are my issues with their beliefs from their theology: they have "a form of godliness, but DENY the power thereof"... (2 Tim 3:5) they DENY who the REAL HISTORICAL Jesus of Nazareth was and IS. He is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, God the Son. To them He is one of many gods who died for them but could not COMPLETELY forgive ALL their sins. They believe in a different Jesus than Evangelicals do because of their "restored" gospel.

2 Cor. 11:3-4 "But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted-- you may well put up with it."

Because this is what happened to Joseph Smith when he prayed:

Gal 1:6-9: "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, (Moroni) preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."

Now I have ZERO problems with the modern day LDS moral code (though I know a few and BELIEVE ME, they DO have SECRET sins!) but I DO have BIG issues with their polytheistic theology.

The prince of darkness is a LIAR, and father of lies, he was a murderer from the beginning, and he said something to Adam and Eve before they sinned-

Genesis 2:16-17 And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."
Genesis 3:5 "You will NOT surely die," the serpent said to the woman," For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God , knowing good and evil."
Again, satan is a LIAR, and father of lies. Why would LDS try to do what he is trying to do?

Satan always has a "crafty" explanation for his lies and deceptions. he is STILL trying to be "like God" (Isaiah 14:14) "I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."
and LDS missionaries are trying to become a god as well.

Isaiah 43:10 "Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

You REALLY need to believe this LDS.

Those are the issues I have.

[Apologette]

As I said above, some of it is true, some of it, I do not believe...which is why I am no longer a practicing Mormon. A lot of what I don't believe has more to do with my rejection of conservative/fundamentalist Christianity, than with Mormonism, per se. I see more truth in Mormonism than in Calvinism (for example), but I think both of these Christian views have a fairly distorted view of Christ and who he really was.

So, you do not believe in the Bible when it says that you are born dead to God and need to be born-again? That God calls those, whom He wills?

I don't think you reject Chrisitianity because of Calvinism, since you could very well go to an arminian Church where that isn't taught. No, I think you actually don't believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Second Person of the Godhead, Who shed His blood for sinful man. Am I right? In fact, you've even (here) questioned whether Jesus existed or not. When you stand in judgment, you won't be able to blame your rejection of the Gospel on Calvin, that's for sure. That's a strawman, anyway. Most evangelicals are not Calvinists at all. It's what you do with Christ that counts.

You cannot be a Hindu-Christian - you cannot serve two masters. I've been to the Hindu Krishna temple in Moundsville, WV. I've toured the main area where all the idols are kept and worshipped. Gave me a creepy feeling, actually. But I was blessed when some women (in the cult) came up to me and began asking questions about Christianity. I didn't persue them at all, just gave them answers to their questions. I remember that while I was talking to them a monk (with six toes on one foot) came up to break up the discussion (must have been his priesthood power not wanting a woman to usurp his position or something). I told him Krishna was not Christ (as he was claiming), and that was about it. I left, but at least the questioning women had some answers. Maybe some even got saved down the road, who knows? One plants, another waters, God reaps! Understand they dug up two bodies on that Krishna Temple compound. Hinduism is not all it's cracked up to be.

"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. "

Did you happen to get lured into the Hare Krishna/Hindu movement over on CARM? I know they were proselytizing over there. One of the persons who posts here, I believe, became attracted to it. Just a question, pretty sure you didn't. That's one of the problems I have with aplogetics sites - those weak in the faith, or the unconverted, are often victimized by numerous cults that seem attractive on the outside. Inwardly, they are ravenous wolves.

[Libby]

I simply went back home. I found SRF many, many years ago and studied with them for three years, before I dropped out. Mainly, just got busy with life, kids, etc. and put it on the back burner. Fell into unbelief for many years (agnostic). Much later, had a profound experience of God in the Book of Mormon (which is why I know, at least, some of it is inspired by God). Had some problems with other things in the LDS religion, so I left. Wanted to go back to mainstream Christianity, because I considered it my "roots". I was raised Christian and baptized in a Baptist Church....but, I sure didn't know enough about fundamentalist Christianity, to really know what I was getting into. Again, problems...things I just could not accept as true (mainly elitist beliefs). So, I finally found my way back home, to the only religion that has ever made sense to me. (Actually, not just SRF, but most of eastern philosophy/religion...Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, etc, all resonant with my soul).. I am a great admirer of the Zen Master, Thich Nhat Hanh, as well.

[Billyray]

I simply went back home. I found SRF many, many years ago and studied with them for three years, before I dropped out. Mainly, just got busy with life, kids, etc. and put it on the back burner. Fell into unbelief for many years (agnostic). Much later, had a profound experience of God in the Book of Mormon (which is why I know, at least, some of it is inspired by God). Had some problems with other things in the LDS religion, so I left. Wanted to go back to mainstream Christianity, because I considered it my "roots". I was raised Christian and baptized in a Baptist Church....but, I sure didn't know enough about fundamentalist Christianity, to really know what I was getting into. Again, problems...things I just could not accept as true (mainly elitist beliefs). So, I finally found my way back home, to the only religion that has ever made sense to me. (Actually, not just SRF, but most of eastern philosophy/religion...Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, etc, all resonant with my soul).. I am a great admirer of the Zen Master, Thich Nhat Hanh, as well.
So basically your lost. Isn't that a fair ***essment?

[Libby]

So basically your lost. Isn't that a fair ***essment?

No.

None of us are truly lost. We are doing what we need to do, to find God.

(That's "you're", btw - Apologette is very fussy about spelling/grammar errors)

[Billyray]

No.

None of us are truly lost. We are doing what we need to do, to find God.


I think you are. BTW what is wrong with following God's word given to us in the Bible?

[Libby]

I think you are.

I know you do.


BTW what is wrong with following God's word given to us in the Bible?

Nothing. I try to follow God's word. I just can't believe that everything in the Bible is actually from God. I think quite a lot of it is from man.

[Billyray]

Nothing. I try to follow God's word. I just can't believe that everything in the Bible is actually from God. I think quite a lot of it is from man.

So instead of believing in God's word and following God's work you ***ume that it is incorrect and you make up your own beliefs where YOU see fit.

[Apologette]

No.

None of us are truly lost. We are doing what we need to do, to find God.

(That's "you're", btw - Apologette is very fussy about spelling/grammar errors)

The difference between Christianity and the religious systems you just metioned is this:

Most if not all "religions" prescribe a way for you to find God - through various methods such as yoga, meditation, works of some sort, etc.

Christianity is a relationship with God through Jesus Christ, and He finds us.

[Libby]

So instead of believing in God's word and following God's work you ***ume that it is incorrect and you make up your own beliefs where YOU see fit.

Well, no. I haven't "made anything up".

[Libby]

The difference between Christianity and the religious systems you just metioned is this:

Most if not all "religions" prescribe a way for you to find God - through various methods such as yoga, meditation, works of some sort, etc.

Christianity is a relationship with God through Jesus Christ, and He finds us.

Every religion is about establishing a relationship with God, whether you think you are the pursuer or God is. It's, actually, a little of both, IMO.

[Billyray]

Well, no. I haven't "made anything up".

Whatever you believe that is not in line with the Bible is made up by you and your excuse is that you don't really believe that the Bible is God's word.

[Billyray]

Every religion is about establishing a relationship with God. . .

God certainly doesn't sanction false religions and belief in false gods.

[Apologette]

Whatever you believe that is not in line with the Bible is made up by you and your excuse is that you don't really believe that the Bible is God's word.

Jesus said that "I" Am the Way. Not Yogananda. Not Buddha. Not Mohammed. If you have the wrong "Way," you'll get lost.

[Libby]

Whatever you believe that is not in line with the Bible is made up by you and your excuse is that you don't really believe that the Bible is God's word.

My "excuse" is that I have a relationship with God that shows me that some of what is in the Bible (especially the Old Testament) is from man, not God.

I know what you "believe", Billy, and that's fine. We are all en***led to our opinons. You will consider me lost and making stuff up, etc, etc. and that's fine. I'm not going to argue in circles with you, because you are not at all open to any alternate view. You are where you are...and I am where I am. I believe God loves both of us.....all of us.

[Apologette]

My "excuse" is that I have a relationship with God that shows me that some of what is in the Bible (especially the Old Testament) is from man, not God.

I know what you "believe", Billy, and that's fine. We are all en***led to our opinons. You will consider me lost and making stuff up, etc, etc. and that's fine. I'm not going to argue in circles with you, because you are not at all open to any alternate view. You are where you are...and I am where I am. I believe God loves both of us.....all of us.

Well, let's go to the New Testament then. Do you believe the Gospel accounts? Do you believe Jesus rose from the dead? If so, don't you think that it's important to believe in the Jesus of the New Testament? Nowhere did Jesus say He'd share his glory with another, right? Not with some guru, some other deity (falsely called god), not with any man. Jesus told us to go into all the world and preach His Gospel - He didn't say "go into all the world and preach the Old Testament." The Gospel is what the OT points to. I don't think we need to get bogged down in OT narratives. There are parts of it that I don't "get" either. But I do "get" Jesus. I know He overcame death, and that in Him, we have eternal life.

The Jesus of Yogananda is an ascended master who lived in India and practiced Yoga and taught his closest disciples God-realization. This is bologna. It's simply an attempt to lend some kind of Christian validity to Yogananda Hinduism. This is just as bad as the Mormon Jesus who came to the New World and sank cities and killed thousands. A lot of groups tell you about "Jesus," but if their Jesus is not the same One that the Bible speaks about, their "Jesus" is a false Christ.

[Billyray]

My "excuse" is that I have a relationship with God that shows me that some of what is in the Bible (especially the Old Testament) is from man, not God.


Since you believe that God has told you that significant chunks of the Bible are false please give me a list of which books/sections you are referring to.

[Libby]

Since you believe that God has told you that significant chunks of the Bible are false please give me a list of which books/sections you are referring to.

No, that would be much too time consuming.

Any section that attributes genocide, the killing of whole races of people, including their animals, any section that claims God "hates" or is "wrathful" and/or "vengeful" is a pretty sure bet, not actually God speaking.

[Libby]

Catherine, I believe Jesus rose from the dead, yes. I believe he healed the sick and fed the poor. I believe Jesus was perfect goodness and in perfect harmony with God.

I also believe he spent the "missing years" studying with a God-Realized teacher and that he did teach techniques of God-Realization to his Apostles.

[Billyray]

Any section that attributes genocide, the killing of whole races of people, including their animals, any section that claims God "hates". . .

Tell me the exact nature of God's revelation to you in which he told you that these sections of the Bible are false.

[Billyray]

I also believe he spent the "missing years" studying with a God-Realized teacher and that he did teach techniques of God-Realization to his Apostles.
Jesus is God. Did you really think Christ needed a "God-Realized teacher" to teach him?

[Apologette]

Catherine, I believe Jesus rose from the dead, yes. I believe he healed the sick and fed the poor. I believe Jesus was perfect goodness and in perfect harmony with God.

I also believe he spent the "missing years" studying with a God-Realized teacher and that he did teach techniques of God-Realization to his Apostles.

Well, some people will fall for anything. All this "Jesus in India" teaching is just mythological. Reminds me of Nephites. The Bible says Jesus grew up in Nazareth, that would be the Holy Land. That is not India. He was a Hebrew, a Son born under the Law. He didn't need to learn God-realization techniques, nor did he ever encourage any of His disciples to practice yoga or meditation or give them a certain mantra. It's simply a silly lie. But you swallow it, right, while at the same time rejecting the Word of God as flawed?

Remember that Luke got his information from Mary - she would have known if Jesus had some kind of enlightenment tour in India!

Jesus was God in the flesh, not God in His mind. God, Himself, took on the additional nature of humanity, that He might come here and suffer the consequences of His own law on our behalf: "the wages of sin is death."

Yoganada (who said he was the reincarnation of William the Conqueror) got fat and rich off of his disciples. You can follow him, or Christ. I think I'll follow the one who overcame death, and who was not subject to it.

Yogananda said:

The average man cannot think clearly . . . He needs the master mind of a Dictator in order to think right and do right." - Yogananda. "Interview". East West Magazine, February 1934, p. 25.

"A master brain like that of Mussolini does more good than millions of social organizations of group intelligence." - Yogananda. "Interview, East-West, February 1934, p. 3.

and

"Hitler is to be admired for leaving the League of Nations because peace can never be attained by the victor and vanquished at***ude, but on a basis of equality and brotherhood. Instead of preventing Hitler from having equal armament with other nations, the other nations should reduce the armaments to the level of Germany, then the millions of dollars that are thrown away on idle battleships could be used for national or international prosperity. America, France, and Great Britain should reduce their armaments first, and thereby destroy the desire of Japan, Russia, and Germany to become equally armed. An insulted, snubbed Germany, if it gets away from the uplifting guidance of Hitler, may join Russia and make her a more powerful enemy of France and so on. The Allies must reduce their own armaments first, and then they will find out that the example speaks louder than words. [Swami Yogananda. "Christmas message to the Nations of the Earth". East-West Magazine, December, 1933, p. 25)" (I'm sure you recall the holocaust and what happened to the Chosen People of God whom Hitler attempted to annihilate)


Let me tell you something, Libby, if you want to know about the demonic rule of Hitler and how he hated Christ and Chrsitianity, read this:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1595552464/ref=asc_df_15955524641940114?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395093&creativeASIN=1595552464&hvpos=none&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=1809778093605113634&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=#_

I promise you, this is a real life-changing book. Give it a try.

Jesus said:

Matt. 23: 8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

My Master is Jesus, so I am compelled to tell you the truth. But I won't bother you anymore since I believe that at this time you have exchanged Jesus for Yogananda.

[Libby]

As I expected, you know nothing but falsehoods about Self-Realization Fellowship, Catherine. This is why I am not interested in your links or any other information from you, whether it's about Mormonism, SRF or even Christianity.

[Apologette]

As I expected, you know nothing but falsehoods about Self-Realization Fellowship, Catherine. This is why I am not interested in your links or any other information from you, whether it's about Mormonism, SRF or even Christianity.

I'm no expert in SRF or Yognanada, but the stuff I've read simply points to the fact that it's an attempt to Americanize Hinduism. There are thousands of gurus all over the place, many of whom come to this country to make their fortune and live pretty much in luxury. They all preach just about the same thing - follow me, I've got the "way" to god consciousness. Same thing. Plus, I've seen that SRF has many proselytizers (just like Mormonism). That's one of the major gripes people mention about them on the net.

As I said, I think you're sold out to Yogananda - can't serve two master, Libby. You'll see that down the road.

But this forum is to discuss Mormonism, not some aberrant Hindu ideology.

[Libby]

I'm no expert in SRF or Yognanada, but the stuff I've read simply points to the fact that it's an attempt to Americanize Hinduism. There are thousands of gurus all over the place, many of whom come to this country to make their fortune and live pretty much in luxury. They all preach just about the same thing - follow me, I've got the "way" to god consciousness. Same thing. Plus, I've seen that SRF has many proselytizers (just like Mormonism). That's one of the major gripes people mention about them on the net.

As I said, I think you're sold out to Yogananda - can't serve two master, Libby. You'll see that down the road.

But this forum is to discuss Mormonism, not some aberrant Hindu ideology.

Well, I agree, some are fakes, just as some popular TV Christians (and others) are fakes. Just because there are fakes, doesn't mean the real thing does not exist. Yogananda had some very rich devotees, who wanted to give and help his cause, but he never owned a thing, himself. He was very careful about that and did not want his name on anything, which is why the organization of Self Realization Fellowship came into being. This organization has been around for almost a hundred years. It's very stable and has some of the most devoted and wonderful people you could ever meet.

SRF does not proseltyze, except to give out information (brochures and such) to anyone who is interested. Not sure why you would complain about proseltyzing, when your religion (Christianity) is the King of proseltyzing.

[Libby]

But this forum is to discuss Mormonism, not some aberrant Hindu ideology.

You were thanking me, just awhile ago, for sharing. Don't expect to make negative comments about my religion, without a comeback. If you continue talking about it, especially in the negative, I will respond.

[Billyray]

You were thanking me, just awhile ago, for sharing. Don't expect to make negative comments about my religion, without a comeback.

You aren't saved from either the LDS point of view NOR the Christian point of view. Why should either side listen to what you have to say?

[Apologette]

Well, I agree, some are fakes, just as some popular TV Christians (and others) are fakes. Just because there are fakes, doesn't mean the real thing does not exist. Yogananda had some very rich devotees, who wanted to give and help his cause, but he never owned a thing, himself. He was very careful about that and did not want his name on anything, which is why the organization of Self Realization Fellowship came into being. This organization has been around for almost a hundred years. It's very stable and has some of the most devoted and wonderful people you could ever meet.

SRF does not proseltyze, except to give out information (brochures and such) to anyone who is interested. Not sure why you would complain about proseltyzing, when your religion (Christianity) is the King of proseltyzing.

I don't stand on street corners p***ing out literature - although I know some Chrsitians do - even picketing Mormon temples and pageants. I'm opposed to that. I looked at a few sites on SRF which stated that they agressively proselytize.

So what if Yogananda didn't technicially "own" anything, big deal. He lived high on the hog. Cult leaders typically live very well due to "donations" from their followers. Look at Smith! Your Yogananda retired to an "estate" (the Encinatas Hermitage close to Swami's point) where he wrote his autobiography, pretty much Scripture for SRF.

Regarding a person who spent time with him:

[Shelly Trimmer] spent about a year with [Yogananda] at the SRF headquarters in Los Angeles but then left.... Although he has retained great affection and respect for Yogananda, he also acknowledges his weaknesses. “He loved to order women about—after all he was a Hindu.... He had a violent temper and was a little bit arrogant” (Rawlinson, 1997).

Well, if you want to follow someone who had a violent temper and was arrogant, that's your choice. I'll follow Jesus.

[Libby]

I don't stand on street corners p***ing out literature - although I know some Chrsitians do - even picketing Mormon temples and pageants. I'm opposed to that. I looked at a few sites on SRF which stated that they agressively proselytize.

I don't know what sites you were looking at, but SRF Monks and Nuns live a very cloistered life and most definitely do not stand on street corners asking for donations or p***ing out literature. You really need to get your information from the source, instead of hate sites.


So what if Yogananda didn't technicially "own" anything, big deal. He lived high on the hog. Cult leaders typically live very well due to "donations" from their followers. Look at Smith!

Yeah, he lived "high on the hog". lol Yogananda was very well thought of, and filled auditoriums all over this country, when he lectured. He came here in the 1920's, long before eastern religion became popular in this country. Have you ever read any of his actual writings?

[Libby]

You aren't saved from either the LDS point of view NOR the Christian point of view. Why should either side listen to what you have to say?

Feel perfectly free to ignore me, Billy. It won't hurt my feelings.

[Apologette]

I don't know what sites you were looking at, but SRF Monks and Nuns live a very cloistered life and most definitely do not stand on street corners asking for donations or p***ing out literature. You really need to get your information from the source, instead of hate sites.



Yeah, he lived "high on the hog". lol Yogananda was very well thought of, and filled auditoriums all over this country, when he lectured. He came here in the 1920's, long before eastern religion became popular in this country. Have you ever read any of his actual writings?

I guess you missed this part:

[Shelly Trimmer] spent about a year with [Yogananda] at the SRF headquarters in Los Angeles but then left.... Although he has retained great affection and respect for Yogananda, he also acknowledges his weaknesses. “He loved to order women about—after all he was a Hindu.... He had a violent temper and was a little bit arrogant” (Rawlinson, 1997).

[Billyray]

Feel perfectly free to ignore me, Billy. It won't hurt my feelings.

I am sure I wouldn't hurt your feelings but I wasn't asking about your feelings.

You aren't saved from either the LDS point of view NOR the Christian point of view. Why should either side listen to what you have to say?

[Apologette]

In any case, a follower of Yogananda's SFR doesn't believe in materiality:

The material universe is not real. [Paramahansa Yogananda, Ak 182]
There is no material universe; its warp and woof is . . . illusion. [Paramahansa Yogananda, Autobiography of a Yogi, ch. 30.]

Never believe that you live. [Paramahansa Yogananda, Autobiography of a Yogi. [Ha 88]

The world is nothing more than a cosmic dream — This life is a dream. [Paramahansa Yogananda Ak 237, 240]

When he [man] awakens in cosmic consciousness, he will effortlessly dematerialise the illusions of the cosmic dream. [Paramahansa Yogananda, ch. 34]

Babaji observed. "The divine realm extends to the earthly, but the latter [is] illusory". [In Paramahansa Yogananda's Autobiography ch. 34]

So, since we are all in some giant cosmic dream, who needs "physical evidences" at all? I wonder if he stole this stuff from Mary Baker Eddy?

[Radix]

Strange to see how you run with this Libby. There are several people mentioned in the Bible we have no direct evidence for. Now Josephus, an early Roman historian who was Jewish did write about Jesus. That is a non Christian reference to Jesus from the first century.

Now we know that the Jewish people were real. Babylonians, Romans and many others actually existed. When I took a world history cl*** in a public college, several of these were discussed. There was never a single mention of Nephites, Jaredites or Lamanites. Everything said of these so called civilizations comes from a single individual who had a rock in a hat pulled over his face. There is no real evidence any of these civilizations ever existed. We have asked you to provide evidence to this, you have provided NOTHING to back that up. Lots of hype (one could say "milk") and speculation, but nothing with any real meat to it.

[Libby]

In any case, a follower of Yogananda's SFR doesn't believe in materiality:

The material universe is not real. [Paramahansa Yogananda, Ak 182]
There is no material universe; its warp and woof is . . . illusion. [Paramahansa Yogananda, Autobiography of a Yogi, ch. 30.]

Never believe that you live. [Paramahansa Yogananda, Autobiography of a Yogi. [Ha 88]

The world is nothing more than a cosmic dream — This life is a dream. [Paramahansa Yogananda Ak 237, 240]

When he [man] awakens in cosmic consciousness, he will effortlessly dematerialise the illusions of the cosmic dream. [Paramahansa Yogananda, ch. 34]

Babaji observed. "The divine realm extends to the earthly, but the latter [is] illusory". [In Paramahansa Yogananda's Autobiography ch. 34]

So, since we are all in some giant cosmic dream, who needs "physical evidences" at all? I wonder if he stole this stuff from Mary Baker Eddy?

I don't think he needed to steal it from anyone. These are well established Hindu beliefs...much older than Christianity.

[Libby]

I am sure I wouldn't hurt your feelings but I wasn't asking about your feelings.

You aren't saved from either the LDS point of view NOR the Christian point of view. Why should either side listen to what you have to say?

Not sure what point you want to make, Billy. Frankly, I don't think anyone listens to anyone, on this forum. Everyone pretty much has their own beliefs (prejudices) and not a lot of listening going on.

[Libby]

Strange to see how you run with this Libby. There are several people mentioned in the Bible we have no direct evidence for. Now Josephus, an early Roman historian who was Jewish did write about Jesus. That is a non Christian reference to Jesus from the first century.

Now we know that the Jewish people were real. Babylonians, Romans and many others actually existed. When I took a world history cl*** in a public college, several of these were discussed. There was never a single mention of Nephites, Jaredites or Lamanites. Everything said of these so called civilizations comes from a single individual who had a rock in a hat pulled over his face. There is no real evidence any of these civilizations ever existed. We have asked you to provide evidence to this, you have provided NOTHING to back that up. Lots of hype (one could say "milk") and speculation, but nothing with any real meat to it.

Radix, even most Christians admit that the writings from Josephus, about Jesus, are possibly a forgery, by some Christian who wanted to invent some "physical evidence".

Most unbiased (non-Christian) ancient history scholars claim there is no real physical evidence of the person called Jesus.

[Billyray]

Radix, even most Christians admit that the writings from Josephus, about Jesus, are possibly a forgery, by some Christian who wanted to invent some "physical evidence".

Where did you come up with the statistic that most Christians believe that Josphus' writings about Christ are a forgery?

[Billyray]

Radix, even most Christians admit that the writings from Josephus, about Jesus, are possibly a forgery, by some Christian who wanted to invent some "physical evidence".

BTW if you want to compare like with like we should compare evidence for the jewish people verses evidence for the nephite people, not an individual within each of the people groups.

[Libby]

Where did you come up with the statistic that most Christians believe that Josphus' writings about Christ are a forgery?

I've seen and heard it many places. Are you going to tell me you have never heard this?

"Despite the best wishes of sincere believers and the erroneous claims of truculent apologists, the Testimonium Flavianum has been demonstrated continually over the centuries to be a forgery, likely interpolated by Catholic Church historian Eusebius in the fourth century. So thorough and universal has been this debunking that very few scholars of repute continued to cite the p***age after the turn of the 19th century. "

http://www.i4m.com/think/bible/jesus_evidence.htm

"For hundreds of years, Catholic historians have used these paragraphs in Josephus' writings as "proof' that Jesus existed. That is, until scholars began to examine the text a little more critically. No serious scholar now believes that any of these p***ages mentioning Jesus were actually written by Josephus. They have been clearly identified as much later additions. They are not the same writing style as Josephus and if they are removed from the text, Josephus' original arguments run in their proper sequence."

[Libby]

BTW if you want to compare like with like we should compare evidence for the jewish people verses evidence for the nephite people, not an individual within each of the people groups.

Yes, but since Jesus is the main personage in Christianity, whether or not he existed is at least as important (moreso, actually) than whether or not Nephites existed.

[Billyray]

I've seen and heard it many places. Are you going to tell me you have never heard this?


I was questioning your statistic that MOST Christians believe Josephus' writings about Christ to be a forgery.

[Billyray]

Yes, but since Jesus is the main personage in Christianity, whether or not he existed is at least as important (moreso, actually) than whether or not Nephites existed.

Yea but if we are going to compare like with like then we should compare evidence for jews verses evidence for nephites. Christians are not asking LDS for evidence for specific individuals within the nephite population but rather evidence for the population as a whole.

[Libby]

I have seen critics ask for physical evidence that Moroni existed, or Nephi or Lehi, so yes, they do ask about individuals, sometimes.

[Libby]

I was questioning your statistic that MOST Christians believe Josephus' writings about Christ to be a forgery.

Well, I retract that, because I don't know what MOST Christians believe on this, but I HAVE known a few Christians who have admitted the Josephus stuff is not reliable. I really thought that was pretty common knowledge.

[Libby]

Here is a short thread on the subject, at CARM, and there certainly seems to be some controversy and doubt about the Josephus writings.

I seem to recall that even Matt Slick said they were forgeries. I'll have to see I can find something from him, on the matter.

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php?82138-Josephus-and-Eusebius&highlight=Josephus

[Billyray]

Well, I retract that, because I don't know what MOST Christians believe on this, but I HAVE known a few Christians who have admitted the Josephus stuff is not reliable. I really thought that was pretty common knowledge.

This is discussed in the link I provided several days ago after the quote below.


This certainly has not been disproven as you claim. Below is a portion from Josephus that speaks about Christ. You can also read about the controversy surrounding this later in the article


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

". . .Flavius Josephus (c. 37–c. 100), a Jew and Roman citizen who worked under the patronage of the Flavians, wrote the Antiquities of the Jews in 93 CE. In these works, Jesus is mentioned twice, though scholars debate their authenticity. The one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum.
In the first p***age, called the Testimonium Flavianum, it is written:

About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease to follow him, for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.[73]"

[Libby]

Well, Matt takes a kind of "maybe/maybe not" approach, but I think there is more evidence that they were probably forgeries than not.

http://carm.org/regarding-quotes-historian-josephus-about-jesus

[Libby]

Why were you presenting it as physical evidence, when you knew a very large shadow has been cast on the information?

[Billyray]

Why were you presenting it as physical evidence, when you knew a very large shadow has been cast on the information?

Because it hasn't been disproven like you ***ume it has.


You didn't even bother to read the link that you just provided.

http://carm.org/regarding-quotes-historian-josephus-about-jesus

". . .Even if both versions have been tampered with, the core of them both mention Jesus as an historical figure who was able to perform many surprising feats, was crucified, and that there were followers of Jesus who were still in existence at the time of its writing. . ."

[Libby]

Because it hasn't been disproven like you ***ume it has.


You didn't even bother to read the link that you just provided.

http://carm.org/regarding-quotes-historian-josephus-about-jesus

". . .Even if both versions have been tampered with, the core of them both mention Jesus as an historical figure who was able to perform many surprising feats, was crucified, and that there were followers of Jesus who were still in existence at the time of its writing. . ."

No, I read the whole thing. I would imagine many Christian scholars are going to give a lot more benefit of doubt, than non-Christian scholars, who seem quite sure that the mentions of Jesus were all added in.

[Radix]

Radix, even most Christians admit that the writings from Josephus, about Jesus, are possibly a forgery, by some Christian who wanted to invent some "physical evidence".

Most unbiased (non-Christian) ancient history scholars claim there is no real physical evidence of the person called Jesus.

I have never heard that one about Josephus Libby.

NO ONE has ever claimed they had physical evidence of Jesus. Other than bones, I'm not really sure what "these" people mean when it comes to physical evidence. But this is just side stepping the issues I brought up.

We have plenty of evidence of the many civilizations mentioned in the Bible, no evidence of any civilization unique to the Book of Mormon. We know where many of the cities of the Bible are located, not one city unique to the Book of Mormon has ever been located. Not a single one. Yet there are those gullible enough to go on Book of Mormon tours.

[Radix]

I've seen and heard it many places. Are you going to tell me you have never heard this?

"Despite the best wishes of sincere believers and the erroneous claims of truculent apologists, the Testimonium Flavianum has been demonstrated continually over the centuries to be a forgery, likely interpolated by Catholic Church historian Eusebius in the fourth century. So thorough and universal has been this debunking that very few scholars of repute continued to cite the p***age after the turn of the 19th century. "

http://www.i4m.com/think/bible/jesus_evidence.htm

"For hundreds of years, Catholic historians have used these paragraphs in Josephus' writings as "proof' that Jesus existed. That is, until scholars began to examine the text a little more critically. No serious scholar now believes that any of these p***ages mentioning Jesus were actually written by Josephus. They have been clearly identified as much later additions. They are not the same writing style as Josephus and if they are removed from the text, Josephus' original arguments run in their proper sequence."

You can go to Wikipedia and look up the references. Subject is Josephus on Jesus. Here we find

"The overwhelming majority of modern scholars consider the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James" to be authentic and to have the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity.[4][1][2][5][6] Almost all modern scholars consider the reference in Book 18, Chapter 5, 2 of the Antiquities to the imprisonment and death of John the Baptist to be also authentic.[7][8][9]"

[Billyray]

I would imagine many Christian scholars are going to give a lot more benefit of doubt, than non-Christian scholars, who seem quite sure that the mentions of Jesus were all added in.

Where does it say that all non Christian scholars believe that the all of the mentions of Jesus were added in?

[Apologette]

You were thanking me, just awhile ago, for sharing. Don't expect to make negative comments about my religion, without a comeback. If you continue talking about it, especially in the negative, I will respond.

I was thanking you for sharing what you were involved with - I don't want to turn this forum into a discussion of Hinduism. If you want to discuss Hinduism, feel free to private message me.

[Apologette]

No, I read the whole thing. I would imagine many Christian scholars are going to give a lot more benefit of doubt, than non-Christian scholars, who seem quite sure that the mentions of Jesus were all added in.

So, do you believe that Paul existed? Or, Peter? Or any of those figures contemporary with Jesus? Or did they all just make up this mythical character named Jesus and then died for Him?

[Apologette]

Because it hasn't been disproven like you ***ume it has.


You didn't even bother to read the link that you just provided.

http://carm.org/regarding-quotes-historian-josephus-about-jesus

". . .Even if both versions have been tampered with, the core of them both mention Jesus as an historical figure who was able to perform many surprising feats, was crucified, and that there were followers of Jesus who were still in existence at the time of its writing. . ."

You know what I think. If a person has abandoned the Jesus of the Scripture, the best way to go would be to pretend He never existed. It's purely a silly tactic, since even atheists acknowledge He existed. Even John Spong believes Jesus existed. It's simply a pretense.

[Libby]

I was thanking you for sharing what you were involved with - I don't want to turn this forum into a discussion of Hinduism. If you want to discuss Hinduism, feel free to private message me.

Then, why are you discussing it on other threads? I really do not care to have a discussion of my religion with you, as I know that you will use lies, smears and distortions, as you do with Mormonism. ..and turn around a claim that you are working for God. Amazing.

[Libby]

You can go to Wikipedia and look up the references. Subject is Josephus on Jesus. Here we find

"The overwhelming majority of modern scholars consider the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James" to be authentic and to have the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity.[4][1][2][5][6] Almost all modern scholars consider the reference in Book 18, Chapter 5, 2 of the Antiquities to the imprisonment and death of John the Baptist to be also authentic.[7][8][9]"

Do you really think Wikipedia is the final word?

I don't know how many believe or don't believe that the Josephus writings are a forgery, but it seems like everyone, even Matt Slick, believes there is some question about them. The couple of examples I posted indicated that the mentions of Jesus were all forged...and that's what I had heard, previously, from various sources.

[Apologette]

Why were you presenting it as physical evidence, when you knew a very large shadow has been cast on the information?

Why do you even ask for evidence since, according to your belief, the material world is an illusion?

[Libby]

Why do you even ask for evidence since, according to your belief, the material world is an illusion?

The critics of Mormonism are the ones who started this whole conversation about physical evidence. My faith in God/Jesus is not based on physical evidence.

[Libby]

Oh, and, as critics are so fond of saying, my beliefs are off the table here. This is the Mormonism forum. Take your off-topic comments to the proper forum. :)

(Note: I'm not really concerned about off-topic conversations, just pointing out the double standards employed by some)

[Radix]

Do you really think Wikipedia is the final word?

I don't know how many believe or don't believe that the Josephus writings are a forgery, but it seems like everyone, even Matt Slick, believes there is some question about them. The couple of examples I posted indicated that the mentions of Jesus were all forged...and that's what I had heard, previously, from various sources.

No I do not, that is why I mentioned you could look up the references listed.

[Apologette]

This link shows extra-biblical sources for the existence of Christ and early Christianity:

http://www.westarkchurchofchrist.org/library/extrabiblical.htm

[Libby]

Wow, that link includes gnostic sources....cool. There are even more of those, in the video I posted.

What I see, before those sources, are a few sources that mention Christians, but not anything about Jesus, himself....except for the controversial Josephus writings.

[Apologette]

Wow, that link includes gnostic sources....cool. There are even more of those, in the video I posted.

What I see, before those sources, are a few sources that mention Christians, but not anything about Jesus, himself....except for the controversial Josephus writings.

Yes, it does. Gnostics were contemporary with early Christians. They believed that Jesus existed (although they denied the incarnation).

So, what's the bottom line here? Are you trying to say that Jesus did not exist? Even the Mormons will fight you on that. What are you trying to say? It seems quite obvious that you are denigrating the reality of Christ as a person who lived in Jerusalem in 1 AD. Are you? Are you trying to say that the New Testament is a pack of myths and that Jesus was a fictional character?

Whatever you are saying, it is very confusing and I'm wondering if that isn't intentional.

[Apologette]

The critics of Mormonism are the ones who started this whole conversation about physical evidence. My faith in God/Jesus is not based on physical evidence.

Hey, why not say you are a Hindu-Mormon? You can have your own little group. They can chant mantras while reading Nephi! They can say that life is a cosmic dream, that reality is an illusion!

You're the one who put up the thread on "physical evidences" not us.

[Libby]

Yes, it does. Gnostics were contemporary with early Christians. They believed that Jesus existed (although they denied the incarnation).

So, what's the bottom line here? Are you trying to say that Jesus did not exist? Even the Mormons will fight you on that. What are you trying to say? It seems quite obvious that you are denigrating the reality of Christ as a person who lived in Jerusalem in 1 AD. Are you? Are you trying to say that the New Testament is a pack of myths and that Jesus was a fictional character?

Whatever you are saying, it is very confusing and I'm wondering if that isn't intentional.

I wish you would read my posts. Your questions have already been answered.

Yes, I most emphatically believe Jesus existed and still exists. I am not denigrating him, in the least. I follow Jesus and believe he was/is a perfect expression of God.

I brought up "lack of evidence" in a discussion about the Book of Mormon. Christians cry for physical evidence of the Book of Mormon and other writings in Mormonism, but have very little evidence of the things they believe in, like Jesus Christ, Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, etc, etc, on and on. Just shows somewhat of a double standard.

Bottom line, I would like to see the critics of Mormonism cease and desist and leave the LDS in peace with their religion. Allow them to worship God in their own way. God is very loving and accepting of all who love him and try to find and follow him.

[jdjhere]

Libby... this IS a chatroom set up for debate, after all. That is the reason for this website, for Christians to share the Truth of the Gospel and to give reasons for their faith and to defend the Faith, once and all delivered to the saints." You tell us to leave the LDS in peace and allow them to believe in their faith while the whole time they are going from door to door trying to "evangelize" people with their "restored" gospel after telling us we have no authority. The LDS leaders have invited us to show them if they have any errors in their doctrine and when we do, the LDS cry foul. The Bible teaches there will be many false christs and messiahs at some point. It also teaches that people will not put up with "sound doctrine." Do you believe the Bible on these points or do you just pick and chose what you want to believe? I dont mean any disrespect to you, but these are valid questions and I am curious.. do YOU believe there WILL there be false christs and doctrine that is not sound at some point, as pointed out by the apostle Paul? Wolves in sheeps clothing? People saying "Lord, did we not prophesy in your name?" and Jesus saying "Away from me, you evil doers.." Do you believe in a being called satan? If so, that he can appear to be a good being? AND his followers? These things are all things mentioned in the Bible and I just wonder how you interpret these things and what they mean to you. Maybe we should chat in the Hindu area. Do you post in the Hindu section? It would be an interesting discussion. Thank you.

[Apologette]

Why were you presenting it as physical evidence, when you knew a very large shadow has been cast on the information?

Because the perponderance of Christian scholars agree there are extra-biblical references to Chirst. Show us evidence that it's a forgery.

[Libby]

Because the perponderance of Christian scholars agree there are extra-biblical references to Chirst. Show us evidence that it's a forgery.

A preponderance of LDS scholars believe there is good evidence for the Book of Mormon.

[Libby]

Libby... this IS a chatroom set up for debate, after all. That is the reason for this website, for Christians to share the Truth of the Gospel and to give reasons for their faith and to defend the Faith, once and all delivered to the saints." You tell us to leave the LDS in peace and allow them to believe in their faith while the whole time they are going from door to door trying to "evangelize" people with their "restored" gospel after telling us we have no authority. The LDS leaders have invited us to show them if they have any errors in their doctrine and when we do, the LDS cry foul. The Bible teaches there will be many false christs and messiahs at some point. It also teaches that people will not put up with "sound doctrine." Do you believe the Bible on these points or do you just pick and chose what you want to believe? I dont mean any disrespect to you, but these are valid questions and I am curious.. do YOU believe there WILL there be false christs and doctrine that is not sound at some point, as pointed out by the apostle Paul? Wolves in sheeps clothing? People saying "Lord, did we not prophesy in your name?" and Jesus saying "Away from me, you evil doers.." Do you believe in a being called satan? If so, that he can appear to be a good being? AND his followers? These things are all things mentioned in the Bible and I just wonder how you interpret these things and what they mean to you. Maybe we should chat in the Hindu area. Do you post in the Hindu section? It would be an interesting discussion. Thank you.

JD, yes, LDS go door to door, but they don't go door to door slamming other people's religions. They go door to door to offer their own religion. When Christians (or any other religion) do that, in a loving way, I think that is quite different than setting up websites and workshops to simply bash someone else's religion. Very different.

Yes, I believe many people teach and actually believe falsehoods. Most of all of us believe "some" falsehoods. Most religions (I would say, probably ALL religions) are a mix of truths and falsehoods. But, I think there is enough truth and good in almost every religion, to allow people to get closer to God. I believe that about your religion, Mormonism and my own religion.

Don't you think we would all be better off focusing on our own walk, rather than criticizing someone else's? I sure do. So much more positive we could genuinely share with one another, rather than dwelling in the negative.

[Apologette]

A preponderance of LDS scholars believe there is good evidence for the Book of Mormon.

Which is meaningless. Why don't you go back to Mormonism, since you spend all your time here backing up their claims? You could call yourself a Mormon-Hindu. That might fit, because both groups have views about God which are in no way in line with the Biblical God.

[Apologette]

I wish you would read my posts. Your questions have already been answered.

Yes, I most emphatically believe Jesus existed and still exists. I am not denigrating him, in the least. I follow Jesus and believe he was/is a perfect expression of God.

I brought up "lack of evidence" in a discussion about the Book of Mormon. Christians cry for physical evidence of the Book of Mormon and other writings in Mormonism, but have very little evidence of the things they believe in, like Jesus Christ, Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, etc, etc, on and on. Just shows somewhat of a double standard.

Bottom line, I would like to see the critics of Mormonism cease and desist and leave the LDS in peace with their religion. Allow them to worship God in their own way. God is very loving and accepting of all who love him and try to find and follow him.

In case you missed it, this forum is for Chrsitians to ****yze Mormonism and to discuss the differences with Mormons. Why should we not warn those who are blindly following a false leader who will lead them into eternal separation from God. Who is loving? The one that warns, or the one that keeps their mouth shut?

[Libby]

In case you missed it, this forum is for Chrsitians to ****yze Mormonism and to discuss the differences with Mormons. Why should we not warn those who are blindly following a false leader who will lead them into eternal separation from God. Who is loving? The one that warns, or the one that keeps their mouth shut?

Since I don't believe their souls are in jeopardy, I think it is much more loving to allow them to worship in peace.

[Libby]

Okay, Jill has asked me to redirect the discussion of the Nag Hammadi to the Hinduism thread.

If anyone is still interested in a discussion about this video, you will find it here.

The thread: http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2705&page=2

The video: http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showpost.php?p=117275&postcount=31

I did get a chance to read the comments, before they were deleted, and wanted to thank those who did participate. It is an interesting subject and does have, somewhat, to do with Mormonism, in that LDS believe there are missing books and information from the Bible. This video discusses that issue.

[Novato]

In case you missed it, this forum is for Chrsitians to ****yze Mormonism and to discuss the differences with Mormons. Why should we not warn those who are blindly following a false leader who will lead them into eternal separation from God. Who is loving? The one that warns, or the one that keeps their mouth shut?

Interesting that someone who calls themselves a Christian cannot spell it correctly. :)

I think it completely sums up Apologette, simply not worth responding too.

Novato

[Novato]

Okay, Jill has asked me to redirect the discussion of the Nag Hammadi to the Hinduism thread.

If anyone is still interested in a discussion about this video, you will find it here.

The thread: http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2705&page=2

The video: http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showpost.php?p=117275&postcount=31

I did get a chance to read the comments, before they were deleted, and wanted to thank those who did participate. It is an interesting subject and does have, somewhat, to do with Mormonism, in that LDS believe there are missing books and information from the Bible. This video discusses that issue.


Hey Libs,

I'm back for a little while, going OS again on Sunday. I love your posts however, I do understand why Jill might want to redirect this discussion to another forum.

Having said that however, I personally do consider that this particular subject is relevant to the Church. Joseph Smith stated many times that there were other Scriptures given to others by the Lord.

Look after yourself and keep on the journey.

Much love,

Novato

[Apologette]

Hey Libs,

I'm back for a little while, going OS again on Sunday. I love your posts however, I do understand why Jill might want to redirect this discussion to another forum.

Having said that however, I personally do consider that this particular subject is relevant to the Church. Joseph Smith stated many times that there were other Scriptures given to others by the Lord.

Look after yourself and keep on the journey.

Much love,

Novato

Well, maybe you should study the difference between Hinduism and Mormonism, and then you might know. Although, I would say there are some similiarities - you think you will become a god, and Hindus think they are God and simply have to realize that.

Why don't you go read the Bhagavad gita - it may just fit your belief system better than the Bible, I'm sure. Maybe you can get the "Authorities" to add it to Doctrine and Covenants as NO prophecy has been coming out of SLC, that's for sure, even though they claim Monson is a prophet. .

[Libby]

Hey Libs,

I'm back for a little while, going OS again on Sunday. I love your posts however, I do understand why Jill might want to redirect this discussion to another forum.

Having said that however, I personally do consider that this particular subject is relevant to the Church. Joseph Smith stated many times that there were other Scriptures given to others by the Lord.

Look after yourself and keep on the journey.

Much love,

Novato

Hi Novato. Glad you got some time off and thank you for the kind words. I know that the two are related (missing scripture and Mormonism), and this video, in part, highlights that. I believe we are all connected at the spiritual level...so, if one opens their eyes, they will see "connections" everywhere.

You take care. God's blessings.

[Apologette]

Hi Novato. Glad you got some time off and thank you for the kind words. I know that the two are related (missing scripture and Mormonism), and this video, in part, highlights that. I believe we are all connected at the spiritual level...so, if one opens their eyes, they will see "connections" everywhere.

You take care. God's blessings.

We are not all connected on the spiritual level. Jesus said:

"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies." John 8:44

Those who receive Jesus Christ (of the Bible) by faith are adopted by God into His family, and it is then they become the children of God:

John 1: 9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

Some are children of God by faith; and others are not.

[Libby]

You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father.

This describes identification with the ego. If we act only from our ego (earthly body & personality) then, our "father" could be described as the devil, as we will be acting from a very selfish, spiteful, often hateful place, desiring only to gratify our own selfish, egoic desires.


John 1: 9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.

Exactly. When we identify with our higher self (the light that gives light to everyone) we will act in accordance with our higher spiritual nature and that light (Christ) will shine through us.

[Apologette]

This describes identification with the ego. If we act only from our ego (earthly body & personality) then, our "father" could be described as the devil, as we will be acting from a very selfish, spiteful, often hateful place, desiring only to gratify our own selfish, egoic desires.

Actually, I've studied psychology. I was a caseworker after all. The ego you describe above may fly in Hindu circles, but Freud would laugh at what you're saying. Take the words of Jesus literally, and believe them.

Exactly. When we identify with our higher self (the light that gives light to everyone) we will act in accordance with our higher spiritual nature and that light (Christ) will shine through us.

Sorry, but this mishmash of Hinduism you are spouting here, coupled with pop psychology, will save nobody. You are a sinner, with a sinful nature. You have no "higher self." You cannot save yourself, for the wages of sin is death. Either you will pay that wage, or Jesus will pay it for you. Your "higher self," is a lost sinner in need of a Savior, not a guru.

[Libby]

Sorry, but this mishmash of Hinduism you are spouting here, coupled with pop psychology, will save nobody. You are a sinner, with a sinful nature. You have no "higher self." You cannot save yourself, for the wages of sin is death. Either you will pay that wage, or Jesus will pay it for you. Your "higher self," is a lost sinner in need of a Savior, not a guru.

I didn't say I could save myself...and, yes, we are all in ignorance (sin), to one degree or another.

[Billyray]

I didn't say I could save myself...and, yes, we are all in ignorance (sin), to one degree or another.

Where do unbelievers go in your world view?

[Apologette]

I didn't say I could save myself...and, yes, we are all in ignorance (sin), to one degree or another.

No, we are no all in ignorance. You have willfully rejected the Gospel, that is not ignorance it is grave sin. You've chosen who you will follow - you trust in another gospel. I pray that you turn and repent.

[Libby]

No, we are no all in ignorance. You have willfully rejected the Gospel, that is not ignorance it is grave sin. You've chosen who you will follow - you trust in another gospel. I pray that you turn and repent.

I haven't rejected the Gospel, at all. I may have rejected some "opinions" about the Gospel, but not the true Gospel.

So, you and Billy are going to heaven and I and all of the Mormons are going to hell...right?

[Libby]

Where do unbelievers go in your world view?

I believe in reincarnation. LDS believe in a type of eternal progression...so, do I, except I believe we come back again and again, either on this earth or other worlds, until we finally become God-Realized.

[Apologette]

I believe in reincarnation. LDS believe in a type of eternal progression...so, do I, except I believe we come back again and again, either on this earth or other worlds, until we finally become God-Realized.

Okay, so Libby says she believes in reincarnation, but above says she hasn't rejected the Gospel. This shows how confusing it gets for someone who tries to live with one foot in Hinduism and another in Christianity (maybe just a toe in Christianity, I guess).

Reincarnation teaches the principle of karma, or basically that we work off our karmic debt caused by wrong actions either in this life (by austerities, meditation, mantra chanting, etc.) or in the next life. Let's say you are a thief in this life - in the next you may have your fortune stolen. That works off your karmic debt.

Anybody can see that the belief in reincarnation has nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity which teaches that we are sinners bound for hell and eternal death. Only a Savior can pay the price for our sins, make us "just as if we never sinned," which is justification before God.

Reincarnation and Chrsitian Atonement are an***hetical and anybody who tells you otherwise is simply lying to you.

[alanmolstad]

Was looking through articles on "evidence for Jesus" and came across a statement from a couple of Christians, stating there faith did not rest upon physical evidence. I was happy to see a Christian admit that, because I know, deep down that most EV Christians really do feel that way, but, for some reason, on these boards, they do not allow that for other faiths, like Mormonism. There is all of this talk about physical evidence,

What type of physical proof would a Christian seek?
As far as I know there were no witnesses for the moment Resurrection inside the tomb.

[alanmolstad]

Faith in the Bible is not at all equal to putting your faith in Joe Smith and the Book of Mormon....
The bible does not represent one guy's ideas and story about how it camre to be.
The Bible does not rest on the story one guy told about it.

The Bible has a rich history of being confirmed over and over....

With the BOM, all we got is Joe....

[James Banta]

Faith in the Bible is not at all equal to putting your faith in Joe Smith and the Book of Mormon....
The bible does not represent one guy's ideas and story about how it camre to be.
The Bible does not rest on the story one guy told about it.

The Bible has a rich history of being confirmed over and over....

With the BOM, all we got is Joe....

Libby is seriously backsliden. She thinks our faith is based on evidence, when the evidence is supplied by God to give us a tangible reason to hold it tighter.. We could believe in the three bears and Goldy Locks but the evidence show us that bear don't talk.. We could believe that the world is flat but Magellan gave us evidence that that is false. Real Faith is supported by evidence it isn't contrary to it.. IHS jim

[Billyray]

I believe in reincarnation. LDS believe in a type of eternal progression...so, do I, except I believe we come back again and again, either on this earth or other worlds, until we finally become God-Realized.

Libby I ***ume that you have changed this viewpoint?

[Libby]

What type of physical proof would a Christian seek?
As far as I know there were no witnesses for the moment Resurrection inside the tomb.

My whole point was that physical evidence is unnecessary. The Holy Spirit stands as witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and his Word. But, Christians often use Bible archaeology as a means of establishing its' reliability...rather than pointing to the witness of the Holy Spirit.

[Libby]

Libby I ***ume that you have changed this viewpoint?

Yes.

With God's help, I am trying to come back in line with biblical Christianity.

[alanmolstad]

My whole point was that physical evidence is unnecessary. The Holy Spirit stands as witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and his Word. But, Christians often use Bible archaeology as a means of establishing its' reliability...rather than pointing to the witness of the Holy Spirit.
well.....the truth is that Jesus did not live that long ago, so I believe that it is an interesting and worthwhile thing to do in looking for proof that he lived.

So while I do not allow things like the current findings of science to take on a religious meaning as they seem to only last until the next findings are found, I still enjoy knowing that from time to science we see new and better support for the Bible all the time.

[Libby]

well.....the truth is that Jesus did not live that long ago, so I believe that it is an interesting and worthwhile thing to do in looking for proof that he lived.

So while I do not allow things like the current findings of science to take on a religious meaning as they seem to only last until the next findings are found, I still enjoy knowing that from time to science we see new and better support for the Bible all the time.

Of course, but that's not what I was talking about. I'm talking about people who, out of one side of their mouth, criticize faith that has no physical evidence...but on the other side, claim their faith is more justified because of physical evidences.

[nrajeffreturns]

Of course, but that's not what I was talking about. I'm talking about people who, out of one side of their mouth, criticize faith that has no physical evidence...but on the other side, claim their faith is more justified because of physical evidences.

I think that's called "inconsistency." :)

[Libby]

I think that's called "inconsistency." :)

That's one of the words you could use, yes. :)

[alanmolstad]

Of course, but that's not what I was talking about. I'm talking about people who, .



Ahhh...who would that be?

[James Banta]

That's one of the words you could use, yes. :)

Since when do we not use the intelligence that God gave us.. Why not hold that the world is Flat? If you blocked out common sense, and scientific reason you could work of a feeling within you that the world is indeed flat..

This is from the Flat Earth Society home page.. Yes there is such a thing..

What does the earth look like?

As seen in the diagrams above, the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge. This is the generally accepted model among members of the society. In this model, circumnavigation is performed by moving in a great circle around the North Pole.

The earth is surrounded on all sides by an ice wall that holds the oceans back. This ice wall is what explorers have named Antarctica. Beyond the ice wall is a topic of great interest to the Flat Earth Society. To our knowledge, no one has been very far past the ice wall and returned to tell of their journey. What we do know is that it encircles the earth and serves to hold in our oceans and helps protect us from whatever lies beyond. (http://theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?***le=FAQ)

Here is their view of the world:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/images/4/43/Map.png

Looks like allowing reason to reveal that which we should hold faith in is reasonable.. IHS jim

[Billyray]

I'm talking about people who, out of one side of their mouth, criticize faith that has no physical evidence...but on the other side, claim their faith is more justified because of physical evidences.

Libby the Bible has historical evidence that supports it. The book of mormon does not have verifiable historic support.

Anyone can claim that they found hidden plates and make up anything that they want and you seem to believe that this is just as much fact as the Bible or any other historically backed event. Libby this makes no sense.

[Billyray]

I think that's called "inconsistency."

What exactly is inconsistent Jeff?

[nrajeffreturns]

What exactly is inconsistent Jeff?

Well, it might be inconsistent if people, out of one side of their mouth, criticize faith that has no physical evidence...but on the other side, claim their faith is more justified because of physical evidences, because IMO faith is by nature trust in something that lacks physical evidence. That's why it's faith, and that's why it's called faith. If you have physical evidence for the existence of something, then we call it something other than faith, such as "knowledge."

There is a reason why Jesus isn't down here in person, doing all the nightly talk shows across all the networks, on live TV.
Do you have a guess as to what that reason might be?

[Billyray]

Well, it might be inconsistent if people, out of one side of their mouth, criticize faith that has no physical evidence...but on the other side, claim their faith is more justified because of physical evidences, because IMO faith is by nature trust in something that lacks physical evidence. That's why it's faith, and that's why it's called faith. If you have physical evidence for the existence of something, then we call it something other than faith, such as "knowledge."

There is a reason why Jesus isn't down here in person, doing all the nightly talk shows across all the networks, on live TV.
Do you have a guess as to what that reason might be?
But Jesus was down here during his life. He had a miraculous birth, he performed many miracles, he taught with power, and he died and was resurrected. We have multiple independent witnesses of these events.

[Libby]

Libby the Bible has historical evidence that supports it. The book of mormon does not have verifiable historic support.

Anyone can claim that they found hidden plates and make up anything that they want and you seem to believe that this is just as much fact as the Bible or any other historically backed event. Libby this makes no sense.

Well, for starters, I'm not "claiming" anything of the sort.

But, just know that the early Christians had no book, just the Holy Spirit. Archaeological evidences do not make spiritual truths anymore true.

Not going to argue this endlessly, either.

[Libby]

But Jesus was down here during his life. He had a miraculous birth, he performed many miracles, he taught with power, and he died and was resurrected. We have multiple independent witnesses of these events.

The New Testament wasn't compiled until two or three hundred years, after Christ's ascension.

[nrajeffreturns]

But Jesus was down here during his life.
True. And there is pretty good evidence supporting that.


He had a miraculous birth
Not much evidence supporting that. None, really. So that one requires faith.


he performed many miracles
You and I have FAITH that Jesus did those. No evidence, really. The Great Randi and David Copperfield and Criss Angel can do tricks that you'd swear were miracles, if you lived 1900 years ago.


he taught with power,
So did Abe Lincoln and many other regular mortals.


and he died and was resurrected.


We have multiple independent witnesses of these events.
It takes faith to believe that those witnesses were telling the truth.

As for the resurrection part, we have faith that occurred, and we believe the written accounts claiming that there were witnesses to it, but it still requires faith.


The reason why Jesus isn't down here right now on CNN or Fox News, providing DNA or other proof as to who He is and what He is, is this: He knows how important it is for us to have a chance to exercise faith in Him instead of being handed sure knowledge right off the bat. If we have strong faith, we tend to be much better Christians than if we started out with knowledge about Christ's divinity. Satan has knowledge, but it didn't make him a good Christian. The martyrs of the 2nd-20th centuries had faith, and they did great things with it.

Jesus knows that we NEED faith. There will be a time when we will see Him in person, nail prints and all. But for now, faith is what we need to develop in order to be the kind of Christians we need to be.

[Billyray]

The New Testament wasn't compiled until two or three hundred years, after Christ's ascension.
The individual books were written not long after the death of Christ during the time of eyewitnesses of Christ and his death.

[Billyray]

It takes faith to believe that those witnesses were telling the truth.
We have actual eye witness testimony of his life, miracles, death and resurrection of Christ. How is this different than other eyewitness testimony evidence that we see in a court of law?

[nrajeffreturns]

We have actual eye witness testimony of his life, miracles, death and resurrection of Christ. How is this different than other eyewitness testimony evidence that we see in a court of law?

Quite a few differences, really:

You can't verify the ID of the ancient witnesses, to make sure they really even existed. How would you prove that any of the claimed 500 witnesses were actually born and were who the Bible claims they were? Got birth/death certificates? Extra-biblical news articles from the period that mention them? Can you cross-examine them, to ask for additional details to corroborate their story that they were really at the time and place where they would have been witnesses, and ask them what they saw?

In a modern trial, you can get ID on a witness, you can verify his address, see a copy of his birth certificate (except for Obama), you can interview his relatives to make sure he's who he claims to be, you can ask him for alibis, others who saw him at the time and place in question, you can ask him more about what he saw, you can check his history to see if the mental hospital has records that he was once committed for insanity...all kinds of things to find out if he is a credible witness.


You can't do any of that with people the Bible claims existed and that the Bible claims saw something.


That's why it's called "faith."

[Billyray]

You can't verify the ID of the ancient witnesses, to make sure they really even existed. How would you prove that any of the claimed 500 witnesses were actually born and were who the Bible claims they were? Got birth/death certificates? Extra-biblical news articles from the period that mention them? Can you cross-examine them, to ask for additional details to corroborate their story that they were really at the time and place where they would have been witnesses, and ask them what they saw?
You can't cross examine the witnesses but you can examine their testimony to verify internal consistency and compare each individual witness to other eye witness testimony. The testimonies were written during the time that people were still alive during the time of Christ to verify the testimony of what was said. As far as news articles--eye witnesses today testify about events in many cases where there are no news articles or even any other witnesses to the event.



In a modern trial, you can get ID on a witness, you can verify his address, see a copy of his birth certificate (except for Obama), you can interview his relatives to make sure he's who he claims to be, you can ask him for alibis, others who saw him at the time and place in question, you can ask him more about what he saw, you can check his history to see if the mental hospital has records that he was once committed for insanity...all kinds of things to find out if he is a credible witness.

You can cross examine him but his testimony is still his testimony and how does a birth certificate change what he has stated?

Bottom line the only real difference is the ability to cross examine a witness to determine the consistency of his testimony. But with the eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus you can examine the written testimony and compare to other eye witnesses the internal consistency and the consistency between two different witnesses.

[nrajeffreturns]

You can't cross examine the witnesses but you can examine their testimony to verify internal consistency and compare each individual witness to other eye witness testimony.
Nope. In 99% of the cases, the testimony wasn't even written by them. It was written by someone else who MAYBE knew them or maybe didn't know them at all.


The testimonies were written during the time that people were still alive during the time of Christ to verify the testimony of what was said. As far as news articles--eye witnesses today testify about events in many cases where there are no news articles or even any other witnesses to the event.
You don't even know who wrote some of the epistles that ended up in the NT. As for news articles: In the case for the existence of Joseph Smith, we can find news articles that mention him existing. Got something like that for Mary Magdalene? In the case of Joseph Smith, there are birth and death records, court records, DNA even. There is proof of his mom and dad and siblings being born or dying. Got any of that for Paul? How can you prove that he existed? Are there people who you can prove were his friends and family?


You can cross examine him but his testimony is still his testimony and how does a birth certificate change what he has stated?
It is possible to create a testimony of a fic***ious person. Like in Forrest Gump. His story might have all kinds of consistency within the book itself, but he is still a fic***ious character, like you believe Nephi to have been.

[Billyray]

Nope. In 99% of the cases, the testimony wasn't even written by them.

99%? Really? Let's look at the 4 gospels and see if your 99% holds true. Fair enough.

Matthew wrote the gospel of Matthew

John Mark wrote the gospel of Mark (the writer of Peter)

Luke was the author of Luke (a companion of Paul)

John wrote the gospel of John


The LDS church would likely agree with at least Matthew and John so I think your percentage was a little bit high. Don't you?

[Billyray]

You don't even know who wrote some of the epistles that ended up in the NT.
That is true we are not sure about all of them and Hebrews is one that we are not sure about. But this epistle is not one that I was speaking about, rather I was referring mostly to the gospels since they are the ones that contain on overview of the birth, life, miracles, death and resurrection of Christ and these are by eyewitnesses of Christ.

[Billyray]

It is possible to create a testimony of a fic***ious person. Like in Forrest Gump. His story might have all kinds of consistency within the book itself, but he is still a fic***ious character, like you believe Nephi to have been.
You bring up Nephi as an example. Let's look at that for a minute. There isn't a single written word about Nephi ever existing in the Americas that predates Joseph Smith. That is a huge red flag. Compare this to the Bible where we have thousands of ancient m****cripts spread around is various locations throughout the Roman empire dating back to as early as AD 120 in the case of P52. And there is some evidence by Dan Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary that a recent find dates back for a fragment to before 100AD which is suppose to be released in the not to distant future which would mean that we have m****cript evidence that dates to the lifetime of living witnesses of Christ. This is a huge difference.

[nrajeffreturns]

99%? Really?
That is my estimate but it could be inaccurate.


Let's look at the 4 gospels and see if your 99% holds true. Fair enough.
Okay, that seems fair.


Matthew wrote the gospel of Matthew
But did Matthew witness Jesus' birth? Was he really there in the stable when Jesus was born? No. He wrote about things he did not witness. Just as I said.


John Mark wrote the gospel of Mark (the writer of Peter)
You can go through the events he wrote just like the accounts that Matthew wrote. Count how many events are mentioned, then count how many that gospel author actually witnessed. Then divide that second number by the first number, and you will have the percentage of events that the author was an eyewitness to.


The LDS church would likely agree with at least Matthew and John so I think your percentage was a little bit high. Don't you?
Yes, I have no problem stating that my estimate might be high.

[James Banta]

Well, it might be inconsistent if people, out of one side of their mouth, criticize faith that has no physical evidence...but on the other side, claim their faith is more justified because of physical evidences, because IMO faith is by nature trust in something that lacks physical evidence. That's why it's faith, and that's why it's called faith. If you have physical evidence for the existence of something, then we call it something other than faith, such as "knowledge."

There is a reason why Jesus isn't down here in person, doing all the nightly talk shows across all the networks, on live TV.
Do you have a guess as to what that reason might be?

Jeff there are places both man made and natural that the Bible speaks of that ARE THERE (Sinai, Bethlehem, The Dead Sea) .. There are people of the Bible that the History of the world also specks of (Nebuchadnezzar, David, even Moses). Does the fact that there is extrabiblical evidence that these places and men existed destroy faith? You understand that it is Faith that Jesus is God that we are speaking of.. What did Jesus teach of such a faith?

John 20:29
Jesus saith unto him, Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Thomas believed because he saw the Lord. It was still counted to him as faith. But to we that have not seen that believe, a special blessing is pronounced. God doesn't give us His word and not provide for evidence for that word. The Bible is filled with the record of God's work among men. There is evidence for that.. Jerusalem stands today as such evidence. Golgotha looms outside the old city as a memorial of the sacrifice Jesus offered for our salvation. There is evidence for God's works. Faith doesn't have to be blind, it must be in Jesus as Savior, and yes Lord, and that He is the Mighty God, the everlasting Father. As James teaches us, we do well knowing that God is one.. That is the first step of faith. To believe that there are many Gods, or just three, is a denial of the faith James taught us to put to work.. It is a denial of The word that came to Isaiah, that God doesn't know that any other God(s) like Him exist..

The BofM, the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith have no such evidence.. There is nothing to anywhere to support either as coming from God. While the bible is supported, While the faith of our fathers has a foundation mormonism is flapping in the wind without even a small line to contain it.. IHS jim

[nrajeffreturns]

You bring up Nephi as an example.
So let's also bring up Adam as mentioned in the Bible as a counterexample, and see where your argument goes from there.


There isn't a single written word about Nephi ever existing in the Americas that predates Joseph Smith.
And there isn't a single written word about Adam ever existing that predates about 1000 B.C.


That is a huge red flag.
Is it a huge red flag when it comes to Adam?

[Apologette]

Well, for starters, I'm not "claiming" anything of the sort.

But, just know that the early Christians had no book, just the Holy Spirit. Archaeological evidences do not make spiritual truths anymore true.

Not going to argue this endlessly, either.

What about the Old Testament - early Christians had that; furthermore, since the inception of the church, letters were circulated by its leaders. We actually have copies of these letters.

You are saying that archaeological evidence is unimportant - that's ludicrous. If there was no Israel, no Jerusalem, no Mt. of Olives, etc., would you still believe the NT?

I'm wondering why you post things intended to comfort Mormons in their denial of the Gospel of Christ?

[Libby]

What about the Old Testament - early Christians had that; furthermore, since the inception of the church, letters were circulated by its leaders. We actually have copies of these letters.

You are saying that archaeological evidence is unimportant - that's ludicrous. If there was no Israel, no Jerusalem, no Mt. of Olives, etc., would you still believe the NT?

Yes.

You wouldn't?


I'm wondering why you post things intended to comfort Mormons in their denial of the Gospel of Christ?

I have no such intent, but I don't intend to speak against the LDS church...or any other (which is why I dropped my discussion of Calvinism).

[alanmolstad]

Was looking through articles on "evidence for Jesus" and came across a statement from a couple of Christians, stating there faith did not rest upon physical evidence. I was happy to see a Christian admit that, because I know, deep down that most EV Christians really do feel that way, but, for some reason, on these boards, they do not allow that for other faiths, like Mormonism. ]

I think you have to be careful to really define your terms well, or else you can get lost and think a person is saying one thing when he actually means another.

[alanmolstad]

in the Bible, Thomas had to see for himself before he would believe...And later Jesus blessed the many who would not need to see yet would believe...

So there are some people who require things to be seen before they can believe, but God will bless they who have not seen yet still believe...

[James Banta]

in the Bible, Thomas had to see for himself before he would believe...And later Jesus blessed the many who would not need to see yet would believe...

So there are some people who require things to be seen before they can believe, but God will bless they who have not seen yet still believe...

It is important to us to have God as the center of our faith and not a man. None of us saw the Gold Plates. Some people believe smith in that report and then put faith in him as God's appointed prophet seer and revelator as he began dismantling the truth of the Holy Scripture in preference to the lusts of his own heart.

The Bible tells us that to be a leader of the Church a man must be the husband of ONE WIFE.. Smith taught that the "NEW" and everlasting covenant could include as many virgins as a man wanted to take.. He himself whether he has relations with them or not took over 30 women as his wives.. He even cause that several married women betrayed their commitments to their husbands in promising to be Smith eternal spouses..

Smith taught against the scripture that teaches that the Lord or God is one Lord and taught that we have three Gods for this world, that anyway they are plural.. He therefore denied God, he denied the teachings that were taught in the Bible. He lead his people after other Gods, he was involved in the same kind of Sin in which Jeroboam lead Israel into (1 Kings 13:1-6).. He was evil before God just as Jeroboam was. His sin must be resisted so as not to lead other into such crimes against God.. IHS jim

[alanmolstad]

yes....I dont have to talk joe smith to know right away he was a con man ....

[Apologette]

Well, for starters, I'm not "claiming" anything of the sort.

But, just know that the early Christians had no book, just the Holy Spirit. Archaeological evidences do not make spiritual truths anymore true.

Not going to argue this endlessly, either.

They had no book? What about the Old Testament? As far as the New goes, letters were circulated to the various congregations, letters written to the Apostles. Archaeological proof of the Biblical narrative is an important support of the truths told - the existence of Israel, the Jews, the coming of the Messiah, the Roman method of crucifixion, etc. Fairy tales never have archaeological proof, and that's the category in which the Book of Mormon falls. You can disparage extant evidence, but that demonstrates nothing but the fact that Mormons are unable to deal with reality: the Book of Mormon is a myth.