RE: In Christianity, blind faith is good faith
May 13, 2015 at 7:03 pm
(This post was last modified: May 13, 2015 at 7:06 pm by Randy Carson.)
(May 13, 2015 at 12:37 pm)KevinM1 Wrote:(May 13, 2015 at 7:41 am)Randy Carson Wrote: This is a misunderstanding of what Jesus was saying to Thomas.
Thomas refused to believe that Jesus had risen until he had put his fingers in the nail holes in Jesus' hands. After doing so, his skepticism was gone.
Believers today do not have that direct evidence; they must rely on the indirect or circumstantial evidence. And they are blessed for accepting that evidence without the benefit of actually seeing and touching Jesus the way the original apostles did. However, this is NOT "blind faith". It is faith based upon EVIDENCE provided by eyewitnesses.
Did you really create an account to reply to a 5 year old thread? Because, wow....
To a new member of the forum, the thread appears as current if you aren't careful to check to OP date.
In my "home" forum, this post would never have appeared to a new user at all.
My apologies.
(May 13, 2015 at 1:06 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote: Believers today do not have that direct evidence; they must rely on the indirect or circumstantial evidence.
I would like to see some indirect or circumstantial evidence. All the clowns ever manage to poop out is hearsay written in a bunch of heavily-edited old books of horseshit.
Then you are misinformed about the historical reliability of the New Testament. For example, when do you think that the gospels were written? Late first century? Early Second? Or were the gospels written much earlier than skeptics like to admit?
