1 Corinthians 15:1-8 - The Gospel That Saves (myth, preach, spiritual)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where exactly can one find the testimony from these men that indicate that they "experienced some of what Paul saw." This is Paul's version of events. But Paul was the stricken man, blind and infirm at the time.
You keep insisting that Paul had an hallucination because he was ill. That is not what the text says. Paul's blindness and stricken condition was the result of Paul's encounter with the risen Jesus. Not the cause of an hallucination.
Even if the men who were with Paul had written about the experience, you wouldn't believe their accounts. And even if they had written about the event, unless what they wrote was copied and recopied, what they wrote most likely would have been lost to time as the parchment or papyrus on which they wrote wore out. Very little of what was written at that time has survived to our day.
You keep repeating the same thing about Paul having an hallucination because he was ill when the text plainly states that his going without food and water for three days, and being stricken blind was after his encounter with the risen Jesus. The text also says that the men who were with Paul also experienced something which means that Paul did not have a subjective hallucinatory experience. But you can't believe it because of your antisupernaturalistic presuppositions. I get that.
I don't know whether to feel sorry for you or to laugh at you. At any rate, I've gone over this with you as much as I intend to. It's pointless to keep covering the same ground over and over again.
Last edited by Michael Way; 05-29-2018 at 07:17 AM..
I am skeptical of a story of a corpse coming back to life and flying away in exactly the same way that I am skeptical of a story of flying reindeer, or an angel named Moroni, just to name a few historically unrealistic claims, this is true. All three stories are equally unreasonable. Make believe and gullibility go hand in hand with unfounded assertions, blind unskeptical faith, and an individual's upbringing and indoctrination. The entire story of the "risen" Jesus can be easily explained as a false rumor spread by the early followers of Jesus, without recourse to any supernatural cause or occurrence.
Yet, you're not skeptical of unbelievers touting the theory that your great great ancestors where apes? You've lost all credibility, and shameless to boot.
You are going to have to make do with what I told you in post #31 where you were already answered.
So, basically you are not willing to admit that the commitment required for faith in Jesus and the Way He taught is no more an act of personal merit that is your big bugaboo than the confession you say is required, but, contrary to what Jesus taught, YOU say it is not required. This is known as easy believism and it sure attracts those not willing to make that change to support your "ministries."
You keep insisting that Paul had an hallucination because he was ill. That is not what the text says. Paul's blindness and stricken condition was the result of Paul's encounter with the risen Jesus. Not the cause of an hallucination.
Even if the men who were with Paul had written about the experience, you wouldn't believe their accounts. And even if they had written about the event, unless what they wrote was copied and recopied, what they wrote most likely would have been lost to time as the parchment or papyrus on which they wrote wore out. Very little of what was written at that time has survived to our day.
You keep repeating the same thing about Paul having an hallucination because he was ill when the text plainly states that his going without food and water for three days, and being stricken blind was after his encounter with the risen Jesus. The text also says that the men who were with Paul also experienced something which means that Paul did not have a subjective hallucinatory experience. But you can't believe it because of your antisupernaturalistic presuppositions. I get that.
I don't know whether to feel sorry for you or to laugh at you. At any rate, I've gone over this with you as much as I intend to. It's pointless to keep covering the same ground over and over again.
Acts tells us that Paul went three days without drinking. Extreme dehydration explains the entire episode. Extreme dehydration explains Paul's collapse. Extreme dehydration explains Paul's blindness. Extreme dehydration and the fact that Paul was tended to by a Christian man explains why Paul hallucinated a vision of Jesus. How do I know that it was a hallucination? Because Jesus was DEAD, having been executed some years previously. And so Paul, living in an age where people believed with childlike ignorance that they experienced apparent examples of supernatural events on a regular basis, and believing his hallucinations to be real, Paul, the former tormentor of Christians, converted to Christianity.
Unlike Jesus, who left nothing written in his own hand, we have the actual words of Paul, contained in letters actually written by Paul, which seem to indicate that his conversion to Christianity was genuine. But we in the 21st century are NOT ignorant children who believe that things like lightning and thunder, earthquakes and storms, are examples of supernatural occurrences caused by the gods. We know that such occurrences are entirely natural and are not the result of any intelligent cause. In just the same way that we know that talking to the dead is impossible. Those of us who no longer subscribe to childlike supernatural ignorance, at any rate.
So, basically you are not willing to admit that the commitment required for faith in Jesus and the Way He taught is no more an act of personal merit that is your big bugaboo than the confession you say is required, but, contrary to what Jesus taught, YOU say it is not required. This is known as easy believism and it sure attracts those not willing to make that change to support your "ministries."
Was the thief on the cross required to work to earn his salvation?
So, basically you are not willing to admit that the commitment required for faith in Jesus and the Way He taught is no more an act of personal merit that is your big bugaboo than the confession you say is required, but, contrary to what Jesus taught, YOU say it is not required. This is known as easy believism and it sure attracts those not willing to make that change to support your "ministries."
Last time. You were answered in post #31. You don't have to like the answer.
Last edited by Michael Way; 05-29-2018 at 11:28 AM..
Yet, you're not skeptical of unbelievers touting the theory that your great great ancestors where apes? You've lost all credibility, and shameless to boot.
My parents were apes, as are you and I. Humans are of the family of great apes. Muscle for muscle, bone for bone, organ for organ, and, nearly, gene for gene, humans (Homo sapiens) are primates of the family Hominidae. We are distinctly different from other apes of course, as other apes are different from each other. But, like it or not, the FACT that we are related is indisputable.
GENOME RESEARCH
Comparing the human and chimpanzee genomes: Searching for needles in a haystack
Ajit Varki1 and Tasha K. Altheide
Glycobiology Research and Training Center, Departments of Medicine and Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, USA
The chimpanzee genome sequence is a long-awaited milestone, providing opportunities to explore primate evolution and genetic contributions to human physiology and disease. Humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor ~5-7 million years ago (Mya). The difference between the two genomes is actually not ~1%, but ~4%—comprising ~35 million single nucleotide differences and ~90 Mb of insertions and deletions.
Humans and chimps are genetically 96% exactly the same. Humans and chimps shared a common ancestor but the line diverged a few million years ago, leading to modern day chimps, and modern humans. This is not make believe that I or anyone else prefers to believe in for personal reasons. This is simply what the evidence tells us.
Acts tells us that Paul went three days without drinking. Extreme dehydration explains the entire episode. Extreme dehydration explains Paul's collapse. Extreme dehydration explains Paul's blindness. Extreme dehydration and the fact that Paul was tended to by a Christian man explains why Paul hallucinated a vision of Jesus. How do I know that it was a hallucination? Because Jesus was DEAD, having been executed some years previously. And so Paul, living in an age where people believed with childlike ignorance that they experienced apparent examples of supernatural events on a regular basis, and believing his hallucinations to be real, Paul, the former tormentor of Christians, converted to Christianity.
Unlike Jesus, who left nothing written in his own hand, we have the actual words of Paul, contained in letters actually written by Paul, which seem to indicate that his conversion to Christianity was genuine. But we in the 21st century are NOT ignorant children who believe that things like lightning and thunder, earthquakes and storms, are examples of supernatural occurrences caused by the gods. We know that such occurrences are entirely natural and are not the result of any intelligent cause. In just the same way that we know that talking to the dead is impossible. Those of us who no longer subscribe to childlike supernatural ignorance, at any rate.
Repeating the same thing over and over and which has already been addressed doesn't make your claim any more valid then it was the first time you made the claim.
Repeating the same thing over and over and which has already been addressed doesn't make your claim any more valid then it was the first time you made the claim.
Acts chapter 9 indicates that Paul did not drink for three days. Failure to drink for three days in a desert clime means that Paul was critically ill. Which explains the entire situation. Unless you can find a way to erase the information that indicates that Paul did not drink for three days from Acts chapter 9, Paul's condition and the reason he underwent a life changing conversion to Christianity are not only apparent, they are easily explained.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
