Is it possible?

[Aiza]

Do you not grasp the meaning of the word 'comtemporary' ? (the apostles did NOT write the Gospels,and Saul never met Jesus)

I think somebody said you claim to be a Phd candidate. May I ask,in which discipline at at which university? What is the title of your Phd thesis.? I'm trying to establish if you have any personal credibility or are being cavalier with the truth.

I was talking about witnesses to Christianity, not just the Bible. The people in Zeitoun all claim to have witnessed the Blessed Virgin Mary, if not the events of the Gospels. Similarly, St. Paul claimed to meet Jesus in a vision, as well as the other Apostles in the flesh, including St. Peter.

But like I said, I don't think most people, when converting to Christianity, are necessarily taking into account witnesses (unless they are a direct witness, as St. Paul claimed to be).

Now, I have not finished even writing/defending my research proposal yet, let alone completed my dissertation. I gave my discipline (molecular biology) but I am not giving my university or anything else. I'm not a student in theology if that's what you think. In terms of religion I am mostly self-taught and am speaking from my own experiences as a convert who has spoken to other converts unless otherwise noted.

[jason56]

I'm scratching my head here, in what way DON'T religious people choose a God?

Don't get me wrong, I like to paint the picture of religious people as pre-programed robots as much as the next man.

Here's a few facts that might shock you:

Religious people are not stupid.
Religious people can determine right from left.
Religious people can count to 10.
Religious people can see colours.
Religious people know when it's night-time.

but...

Religious people choose to believe in God.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Religious people are not stupid.
Religious people can determine right from left.
Religious people can count to 10.
Religious people can see colours.
Religious people know when it's night-time.

but...

Religious people choose to believe in God.

False premise based on,unsupported generalistions.The conclusion is a non sequitor,not following from the premise (even assuming it was true)

That a person is capable of reason and rational thought does not infer that he will consistently use those abilities or use them in any given circumstance So far,I've never met anyone who does.

I agree with Jung,who claimed that (generally speaking) our most powerful beliefs and attitude have little if anything to do with reason. A life time of observation,and a few years on a bunch of internet forums has only reinforced that perception.

---

I was talking about witnesses to Christianity, not just the Bible

So was I.

Seems clear we have very different ideas of what constitutes 'proof'


By all means continue with your Catholic apologist position. I will continue to be right.

[Aiza]

"Proof" is sort of a loaded term given its mathematical connotations. I was only mentioning witnesses, and the way you brought up "contemporary" and "the gospels" made it sound as if you were focused on the Bible in particular.

If not, I apologize.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

"Proof" is sort of a loaded term given its mathematical connotations.

Nice evasion;



Perhaps have a look at some of the meanings of the word 'proof and have a go at working out some appropriate meanings in the context of this forum.