It's a funny thing...

[Matthias]

In what context? Few things outside of religion require that kind of belief or disbelief.

I didn’t have anything in particular in mind. Virtually all of history requires us to believe in persons, places, things and events that we haven’t seen in-person, and can’t.

 

[Riven]

I didn’t have anything in particular in mind. Virtually all of history requires us to believe in persons, places, things and events that we haven’t seen in-person, and can’t.

Very true. I certainly question many things about the history that the victor inevitably writes. It isn't only biblical accuracy and it's reliability as a source of history that I hold in contention.

If it were merely mythological, it could be easily dismissed as just that --- myth. The trouble that biblical literalist face, and what I face as well, is the supernatural elements of the text. You don't have to believe in the supernatural to believe in the moon landing, for example. But you do have to believe in the supernatural to believe in divine miracles.

The latter requires far more evidence because it is outside of the norm. And i want to be clear: i don't believe in cherry picking. In other words, I don't think it is logical to say we believe in the story of Noah's Ark, but not the Resurrection.

Likewise, I think it applies to other religions as well. How do you believe in the Resurrection story, but not the story of Islamic prophet Muhammad, flying to heaven on a winged horse? Both of these are supernatural events with no evidence beyond hearsay and other third party accounts. Why choose one over the other, and how do you do that? How do you rationalize it? How do you justify it?

 

[Lambano]

In what context? Few things outside of religion require that kind of belief or disbelief.


Ideally, God would interact with humanity directly instead of hiding. Otherwise, ones relationship with Yaweh isn't any different than the ancient Greek's relationship with Zeus.

That's an interesting longing. Not what I expected, though I'm not sure what it was that I did expect..

 

[Matthias]

Likewise, I think it applies to other religions as well. How do you believe in the Resurrection story, but not the story of Islamic prophet Muhammad, flying to heaven on a winged horse? Both of these are supernatural events with no evidence beyond hearsay and other third party accounts. Why choose one over the other, and how do you do that? How do you rationalize it? How do you justify it?

It seems to me that this may boil down to the question of how to investigate / evaluate competing truth claims.

Does the fact that there is a supernatural element involved preclude any possibility of you believing something is, or may be, true?

 

[Riven]

It seems to me that this may boil down to the question of how to investigate / evaluate competing truth claims.

Right. How do you do that? How do you discern what the truth is?

Does the fact that there is a supernatural element involved preclude any possibility of you believing something is, or may be, true?

Not at all. But supernatural claims during that time, and from that part of the world, are a dime a dozen. So there has to be something more than just "well, it's in my favorite book" or "he's my favorite person" in order for me to take it seriously.

Just think about it. If I were to tell you that I died three days ago and came back today, you wouldn't believe. None of you would believe me. But if I had done it 2,000 years ago, and somebody wrote a book about it, you'd all believe it then.

 

[Matthias]

Right. How do you do that? How do you discern what the truth is?

That’s discussed in two books which I recommended to you: Cold Case Christianity and Forensic Faith. I would apply the methods in investigation / evaluation of all truth claims.

Not at all.

I’m pleased to hear that. As much as we have talked, I still wasn’t certain about the matter.

But supernatural claims during that time, and from that part of the world, are a dime a dozen. So there has to be something more than just "well, it's in my favorite book" or "he's my favorite person" in order for me to take it seriously.

As well it should.

Just think about it. If I were to tell you that I died three days ago and came back today, you wouldn't believe. None of you would believe me. But if I had done it 2,000 years ago, and somebody wrote a book about it, you'd all believe it then.

I wouldn’t believe it without investigating it thoroughly.

 

[Matthias]