The Minimal Facts for the Resurrection of Christ.

[Misty]

Oh that's lovely, by the way. I genuinely mean that. Despite all the conflict, it still made me smile. If nothing else we know is true, at least the moon and stars will still shine for us on a dark night.

Thanks.

 

[just me]

I am reminded of the lyrics to the song "Sounds of Silence" for some reason.

 

[QuickTwist]

I am reminded of the lyrics to the song "Sounds of Silence" for some reason.

 

[meowzician]

But you are dictating it, and poorly at that. You may have your own new faith now… but that doesn’t give you the right to come in and tell everyone here who believes in the “dogma” of Christ’s resurrection - that they are any less studious on the matter than you are, or that they are incorrect because they don’t meet what you have deemed as evidence.

Besides that - those of us who have chosen to be faithful in this life rely mainly on exactly that, our faith. God calls us to walk by faith and not by sight, after all, does He not? Not on whatever wisdom we claim in His name.

If someone is not giving the kind of evidence that actually proves something, I am going to point that out. It doesn't mean I'm opposed to faith. I actually support faith. What I'm against is people saying that they have faith because X proves it. For one thing, if it is proven, it doesn't take any faith.

Let me give an example of what I mean. When I was 15, my Sunday School class began reading a book together by Josh McDowell called "Evidence That Demands a Verdict." Now at that time, I was a firmly convinced Christian, so the reasons for my reaction CANNOT be blamed on my wanting to undermine Christianity. Basically, I was appalled by the book.

The small reason was because even at age 15, I could see all sorts of holes in his reasoning, and I can't tell you how discouraging it is when your Sunday School class is given something so sloppy to study--it's embarrassing on behalf of my religion.

But by far the deeper reason I was disgusted with the book is because it confused faith with things we accept as true because the odds that they are true are so high. To me, that's not faith. That's reasoning.

Faith comes from an entirely different area in our minds than the reasoned truths that we accept. It's not that it doesn't have some interaction with our reasoning--but the reasoning is not what is primary. Faith comes from what we intuit. It springs from the same part of the mind that governs analogy and metaphor and patterns--an entirely different kind thinking than logic. It is far more related to poetry and art than it is to logic. Faith is beautiful, and meaningful, and precious. But it is NOT based on "evidence that demands a verdict."

 

[meowzician]

Shabbat Shalom. Why are you on the forum?

-Giammarco

By forum, do you mean INFJs.com? Because I'm INFJ and want to interact with other INFJ's.

Do you mean this subforum, Philosophy and Religion? Because I LOVE discussing religion. In fact, I have a preference for discussing religion with those I disagree with because they are the ones that make me think, and that's what leads to spiritual growth.

 

[just me]

Faith is the substance of all things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

We all need critical thinking.

 

[meowzician]

Everyone keeps fighting over who is right, and all I can think is "What if none of us are?"

It is my assumption that I am wrong on a great many things. The problem is, I'm not conscious what they are. And that's why I keep turning things over and over, looking for my mistakes. And if the only people I listen to are those who agree with me, or who are only interested in those things we share in common, I'm never, ever going to find those mistakes.

 

[meowzician]

She wasn’t chastised for taking up his debate she was chastised for mocking God and another persons faith. Big difference.

I never, EVER mocked God. Are you kidding me? God is the axis around which my life turns. Nothing else comes even close to inspiring the awe and love that I feel for God. Misty, I don't know why you concluded this. Maybe I just did a terrible job communicating. I can only tell you that you have completely misjudged me.

 

[QuickTwist]

If someone is not giving the kind of evidence that actually proves something, I am going to point that out. It doesn't mean I'm opposed to faith. I actually support faith. What I'm against is people saying that they have faith because X proves it. For one thing, if it is proven, it doesn't take any faith.

Let me give an example of what I mean. When I was 15, my Sunday School class began reading a book together by Josh McDowell called "Evidence That Demands a Verdict." Now at that time, I was a firmly convinced Christian, so the reasons for my reaction CANNOT be blamed on my wanting to undermine Christianity. Basically, I was appalled by the book.

The small reason was because even at age 15, I could see all sorts of holes in his reasoning, and I can't tell you how discouraging it is when your Sunday School class is given something so sloppy to study--it's embarrassing on behalf of my religion.

But by far the deeper reason I was disgusted with the book is because it confused faith with things we accept as true because the odds that they are true are so high. To me, that's not faith. That's reasoning.

Faith comes from an entirely different area in our minds than the reasoned truths that we accept. It's not that it doesn't have some interaction with our reasoning--but the reasoning is not what is primary. Faith comes from what we intuit. It springs from the same part of the mind that governs analogy and metaphor and patterns--an entirely different kind thinking than logic. It is far more related to poetry and art than it is to logic. Faith is beautiful, and meaningful, and precious. But it is NOT based on "evidence that demands a verdict."

You've grossly misinterpreted Josh McDowell. I won't pretend to know the reason why. Something was clearly off about anyone giving reasons for Christianity for you. Of that, I am sure. You wanted Christianity to be a conviction only, and not something that can be reasoned out. So, you invented questions addressed to the book because you found the book's premise unsatisfying. You judged the book based on an idea that faith, as it were, was not an intellectual pursuit. That's probably why you found yourself a Jew years later. Because Judaism purports itself mostly as an intellectual pursuit, while Christianity purports itself as a thing of faith. The truth is that Christianity is just as intellectually robust as Judaism is. You just don't like the fact that Christianity also appeals to the intellect for some reason (which I will refrain from theorizing about).

 

[meowzician]

Just because a person is Jewish and disagrees that Jesus is God is in no way mocking that faith.

Thank you, Fruiteloop. I have to say, I'm absolutely baffled by this accusation that I am mocking God. First, because I love God with all my heart, all my soul, and all my strength. But also because I have repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly expressed that I am fine with people being Christian.

 

[QuickTwist]

Thank you, Fruiteloop. I have to say, I'm absolutely baffled by this accusation that I am mocking God. First, because I love God with all my heart, all my soul, and all my strength. But also because I have repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly expressed that I am fine with people being Christian.

I'd never say you were mocking God by being a Jew. I think it is wrong, and I think this exact thing is talked about in the Bible in many places in different ways. But, Paul says of the Jews, "They have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge." The knowledge he is talking about is not intellectual knowledge. Their zeal is based on intellectual knowledge. Their lack of knowledge is a lack of experience of God. The Bible says elsewhere that some people, "holding to the form of godliness but denying its power. Avoid these people."

 

[meowzician]

No one is trying to convert her. Definitely not me.


I was talking about minus sign, not meow, who has fallen conspicuously quiet.

I'm not consistent about this, but it is common for me to take a break from my online stuff on Friday, when I'm getting ready for Shabbat, and on Shabbat itself.

I want my home to be clean so that I can relax rather than be nagged by undone tasks. I want to be showered and do my hair so that I feel great about myself. I want the menu planned, the shopping done, and all the cooking finished and resting on the electric warming tray BEFORE sunset, so that I can totally relax and have great food without having to cook. It gives me a day where I can just BREATHE! Instead of controlling nature, I can just BE a part of nature, and reflect on my Creator.

The worship service on Friday night is the highlight of my entire week. I can't put into words what it means to me. It feeds my soul. It feeds my heart, to turn my attention towards the One who inspires my love and my awe. I never miss this unless I am too sick or wiped out to get out of my recliner.

Saturdays are varied. Sometimes I'll attend a Torah service or Torah study. Other times, I just relax in my pajamas and bunny slippers all day. Sometimes I just sleep a lot, because I get so little sleep during the week. So there is just no telling whether I'll be online or not.

Though I think there was some mockery from her as well. I’d have to look for that, honestly.

I am so sorry if my words created this misunderstanding.

 

[meowzician]

Because Judaism purports itself mostly as an intellectual pursuit,

My friend, I'm not going to share Judaism with you unless you ask, and I suspect that is not going to happen. But please know that you just grievously misrepresented Judaism. Is there a rigorously intellectual side to it? Absolutely. We have our Rambam. But there is also a deeply mystical, experiential side to it as well. We also have our Baal Shem Tov. If I go to a Torah study, heck yeah it is absolutely a rigorous intellectual discussion. But when I worship on Friday night, it is all heart. When I sing the psalms, it's like the very hand of God reaches down and touches my soul.

 

[QuickTwist]

I am so sorry if my words created this misunderstanding.

Mocking is not the word I would use. A bit of condescension, but not mocking.

 

[meowzician]

I'd never say you were mocking God by being a Jew. I think it is wrong, and I think this exact thing is talked about in the Bible in many places in different ways. But, Paul says of the Jews, "They have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge." The knowledge he is talking about is not intellectual knowledge. Their zeal is based on intellectual knowledge. Their lack of knowledge is a lack of experience of God. The Bible says elsewhere that some people, "holding to the form of godliness but denying its power. Avoid these people."

Is "they" an "their" referring to Jews? Please don't judge me by what others say about me. Please do me the courtesy of asking *me* what I think, what I feel, and what I experience. I'm sure you want the same for yourself. It's a basic application of the Golden Rule. If I've misunderstood you, and "their" is not referring to Jews, just toss out this entire reply. LOL

 

[meowzician]

Mocking is not the word I would use. A bit of condescension, but not mocking.

I don't look down on you. Not even a little bit. And if I said things that made you feel that way, I apologize from the bottom of my heart.

 

[QuickTwist]

My friend, I'm not going to share Judaism with you unless you ask, and I suspect that is not going to happen. But please know that you just grievously misrepresented Judaism. Is there a rigorously intellectual side to it? Absolutely. We have our Rambam. But there is also a deeply mystical, experiential side to it as well. We also have our Baal Shem Tov. If I go to a Torah study, heck yeah it is absolutely a rigorous intellectual discussion. But when I worship on Friday night, it is all heart. When I sing the psalms, it's like the very hand of God reaches down and touches my soul.

You put the cart before the horse...

You "found" that intellectual thing you were craving in Judaism and not Christianity. It had nothing to do with Christianity as such. It was that Christianity wasn't something you WANTED to be intellectually rigorous, for whatever reason. I'm not making this up. This is the way you described it yourself. You are free to correct me. I'm just reading between the lines of what you said and what brought you out of Christianity. You claim it was the intellect that you left Christianity because Jews don't have the same kind of intellect in their religion. But Christianity has plenty of intellect as well. The Church has been writing about it for 2,000 years. It's true that some of Christianity has been polluted by pagan thought. I fully admit that. But there have also been Jews following Jesus for 2,000 years.

 

[QuickTwist]

Is "they" an "their" referring to Jews? Please don't judge me by what others say about me. Please do me the courtesy of asking *me* what I think, what I feel, and what I experience. I'm sure you want the same for yourself. It's a basic application of the Golden Rule. If I've misunderstood you, and "their" is not referring to Jews, just toss out this entire reply. LOL

I'm just quoting the part of the Bible you reject. From Paul, speaking of the religious leaders.

And frankly, me and my experiences don't matter much. What matters is what is true. I go by the Bible: "Let God be true and every man a liar."

 

[meowzician]

So now here we are, with disappointingly few opinions shared about Jesus' butt.

Is it going to get me into hot water if I admit you crack me up with this? Would it help if I told a joke about Jews? I have a gazillion.

 

[meowzician]

You put the cart before the horse...

You "found" that intellectual thing you were craving in Judaism and not Christianity.

I have an enormous respect for intellect. But there is a reason there is an F in INFJ. Your depiction of me is WAY off.