Why don't Christians understand?

[AndrésC64]

Why don't they understand the difference between evidence and claims? Christians are constantly referencing the Bible as they try to buttress their claims. The Bible isn't evidence. The Bible is the claim. Why can't they understand this?

Updates

+1 y

And for people whining, as the usually do, about this question being directed at Christians, I also include Jews, Muslims, etc. But since this country is the vast majority Christian and Christians are the ones that are constantly saying these things to me. That's why my question was worded that way. But anyone else of any other religion is free to answer also.

[jshm2]

Why don't you understand no one gives a shit about your old chestnut, strawman assertions?

You aren't even educated enough to know the difference between faith and theory. But expect life's big answers to be put into a 10 minute Youtube you can monetize!

Understand that the problem is with you, not others. That you're getting from faith exactly what you've put in all your life - fuck all. It's not something you can just be taught either. If you put in for an Ivy league school it doesn't mean you are now a PhD candidate.

[AndrésC64]

Are you going to try to answer the question?

[sean1234]

The kjv only becomes evidence when it's proven. It's like being healthy, when one proves let's say smoking causes lung cancer; just because the smoker doesn't want to look at the proof, doesn't mean they won't get the cancer. Look at this fake pandemic, all the people who ignored it are fine as if there was no pandemic, the others that took the shot got sick. One has their religious belief and get sick, the other has theirs and do not.

[sean1234]

And to note, the kjv has been proven. If you only want to look for why it has not been proven true then that's just your religious belief in onesidedness.

[AndrésC64]

You are absolutely incorrect about the real pandemic.

ourworldindata.org/.../united-states-rates-of-covid-19-deaths-by-vaccination-status

[AndrésC64]

The KJV has been proven? Really?

*Citation Needed

[menina]

I guess that's because they truly believe in their religious texts. If the text says something, then that something becomes evidence. They cannot think past that.

By this, I'm just answering the question. I have no intention of disrespecting people's beliefs.

[AndrésC64]

I think you are right. People get so wrapped up in their religion, and they get so myopic, that they can't even think outside of their own little box.

[menina]

Yes, that's exactly what I think. Which is why I think there's no point in arguing with them.

[AndrésC64]

I keep hoping that at least someone will be open to logic. Or at least give them something to think about.

[menina]

I understand you but most of the times they aren't. Or they don't want to think about it.

[annabananna]

I’m a Christian and I know the difference and know that their isn’t much evidence in many of the things in the Bible. I just have faith.

[AndrésC64]

👍 Many people don't know the difference.

[DynamicKicker]

I believe you’re mistaken when you say “evidence vs claim”. The Bible scriptures are not simply just “claims.” If you’re referring to specifically the beliefs and practices of the followers reading from the scriptures, then “evidence” is sort of a silly expectation because religion is fundamentally faith-based. With regard to historical accuracy, many of the scriptures are widely accepted among scholars as historical documents, as they just account events from a perspective. One problem however, is that generally they aren’t reliable for dates. For example if you use the Jesus temple story from Luke to try to accurately date Jesus’ birth, you’ll find many inconsistencies across the other gospels. But we know for fact the documents are historical because they also coincide with other historical documents from other 3rd party Roman accounts (for example, Flavius Josephus’ written records).

[AndrésC64]

The Bible scriptures are claims. They make all kinds of fantastical claims. I'm asking for evidence to support those claims.

Do you have a couple examples of scriptures being widely accepted as historical documents? And just because parts of it are true, doesn't make the whole thing true.

As far as Josephus goes, it's far from widely accepted. In fact, many experts believe that it's a forgery.

[DynamicKicker]

You’re still mistaken. Bible scriptures are NOT simply just “claims.” Any basic reading through something like the letters of Paul or Luke would dispel this. Certain pieces of scripture make claims (mainly the apocrypha books such as revelations or the books of the prophets, then this is true). Also no, the Josephus texts are NOT forgeries (though have been subject to certain middle-ages Christian interpolation, such as the ascension part). It’s also not a “forgery” because it contains many other important historical Roman documentation outside of religious meaning. One infamous quote from the text is “James, brother of Jesus who is called Christ” is a widely known and widely accepted part of his writings. Specific examples of scripture being used as historical documentation would be the death and crucifixion of Jesus, which the Bible passages directly correlate exactly with the Annals written by Tacitus. Not to mention all of the parallels between the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke)‘s accounts of John the Baptist and Flavius Josephus’ records as well. I don’t have any specific quotes, but they are pretty easy to find. I do agree with you that there are parts of scripture open to interpretation and even some question to the validity of historical documents (due to interpolation) however questioning the documents in their entirety would basically be disingenuous.

[AndrésC64]

>You’re still mistaken. Bible scriptures are NOT simply just “claims.”

I never said that it was simply claims, I said that it was claims. And that's what it is.

>Any basic reading through something like the letters of Paul or Luke would dispel this.

Do tell.

>Certain pieces of scripture make claims (mainly the apocrypha books such as revelations or the books of the prophets, then this is true).

So you don't think that things like the world being a few thousand years old, a global flood, people living to be a thousand years old, people rising from the dead, ETC aren't claims? Really?

>Also no, the Josephus texts are NOT forgeries (though have been subject to certain middle-ages Christian interpolation, such as the ascension part).

That's your interpretation. Many experts disagree.

>It’s also not a “forgery” because it contains many other important historical Roman documentation outside of religious meaning.

The parts about Jesus are absolutely questionable and considered forgery by many.

And the rest of what you had to say is irrelevant. I never claimed that it was all a forgery.

[DynamicKicker]

You're still mistaken. The bible is not claims. This is factually false. You talk about the bible like its a singular book, when in reality the Bible is NOT a book, it is a collection of books. "The parts about Jesus are absolutely questionable and considered forgery by many." This is also factually false, and there is a difference between interpolation and forgery. What peer-reviewed sources are you using claiming all of Josephus' parts about Jesus are fake?

>>Any basic reading through something like the letters of Paul or Luke would dispel this.
>Do tell.

Judging by this, I'm going to assume you haven't read all of the books of the Bible. If you're asking which parts, ALL of them. If you want a specific reading, go read the entire of Galatians 2 (I prefer NASB), it is about 2 or 3 paragraphs long and is Paul discussing the council of Jerusalem.

[AndrésC64]

Fine. The Bible contains numerous claims as I have already pointed out. Happy?

It's nice to see that you don't have any problem with flat out lying. Not sure if I really want to continue this any further given that fact.

[DynamicKicker]

I'm not lying at all. I'm simply presenting things as they are. You're trying to be disingenuous by making a general statement like "the entire bible is making claims I don't believe in!" which just isn't true, and shows you haven't actually read the bible yourself. Containing things ISN'T the same as the entirety being. I hope one day you can overlook your own personal bias/judgement and read into the bible and the accounts for their historical significance rather than just the religious aspects that you may/may not agree with. Thanks for the talk.

[AndrésC64]

> I'm not lying at all.

Yes, you are. And if you continue to do it I'll simply block you because I don't deal with blatant liars.

You said (CLAIMED) that I said, and I quote, "the entire bible is making claims I don't believe in!"
Do it again and you will demonstrate yourself to be an incorrigible liar and this conversation over and you are blocked.

Go ahead, prove to me to a fact that the Bible is not a claim. You don't think that when it talks about people being 900 years old, a global flood, people rising from the dead, blindness and deafness are caused by demons and are cured by exorcisms, drinking poison won't harm you, Jesus walks on water, Jesus feeds 15,000 people with two loaves of bread and two fish, Goliath was 10 ft tall are claims? Those things are in the Bible. It says (claims) those things in the Bible, that makes them claims.

Fine, I don't feel like arguing about fiction. It's kind of like who would win Batman or superman. The fact of the matter is that Josephus died before Jesus was even born. That makes everything he has to say hearsay.

[AndrésC64]

* Oops, Jesus died before Josephus was even born.

[OpenClose]

Because it's less about what is true and more about defending something they've tied their identity to.

It's why their idea of Jesus is usually a gun-toting Republican from the south. Accuracy has nothing to do with it. It's identity politics.

[SiberFox]

Go say that to muslims about their book or jews about their, and please let us know how they reacted

[AndrésC64]

I would have absolutely zero problem saying that. Why don't you try answering my question though?

[MrTaboo]

Because from a historic standpoint, it's the most historically accurate book in history.

[AndrésC64]

Even if I do take your word for it. That still doesn't mean that one word of the magical events are true.

[MrTaboo]

Which one

[AndrésC64]

Which one what?

[MrTaboo]

Magical event

[AndrésC64]

Take your pick. Rising from the dead, making the dead walking the streets, people living for nearly a thousand years, floods, plagues, angels, devils, cleansing lepers, curing dumbness, and leprosy by casting out demons, etc...

[MrTaboo]

So the God of the world, who made the universe can't do that?

[AndrésC64]

He would have to exist first. Do you have any evidence to support the existence of this God?

[MrTaboo]

Biology, science, physics all far to complex to just "exist" by accident

[Googlemyahoo]

They fear missing out on something. All their behaviour is predicated on expecting some kind of divine reward. If a person is only decent for that reason they’re pieces of shit.

[slatyb]

If they understood that, they wouldn't be Christians.

[AsaKyo]

I just assume most Christians are crazy, so what they say doesn't matter

[jimmy2]

Look God is real there no need of evidence but want evidence the Bible has many witness

[AndrésC64]

Nope. There is not one single eyewitness in the Bible anywhere.

[AndrésC64]

The Gospels were written by unknown authors. The names on them got assigned by other people. There are no signed copies.

[jimmy2]

I know that I am saved

[AndrésC64]

No you don't. You hope that you are. You have no evidence that your God is even real let alone is going to save you.

[jimmy2]

I don't bit on my Soul you all are I know God

[AndrésC64]

What?

[jimmy2]

John 3:16

[AndrésC64]

LMFAO! He answers a question about why Christians don't understand that the Bible isn't evidence by quoting the Bible. 🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️

[OddBeMe]

They think a magic man lives in the sky. Of course they think he wrote the bible…thus its evidence.

[Midgetmcwidget]

Shabbat