Hello

New? Introduce yourself here.
User avatar
Theophilus
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:09 am
Contact:

Re: Hello

Post by Theophilus » Sat Mar 06, 2010 8:23 pm

Historical documents don't describe supernatural events.
Yes they do (the Gospels clearly describe supernatural events, and they are clearly documents written long ago in history), you may just choose to work from a presupposition that the supernatural events can't be real, but that is a case of reading your own presuppositions into the documents (which we all do, me included) :biggrin:
Christianity may not have take off if Constaine had not converted,,.
Well, that's another topic really - we know that Christianity was established around the Mediterranean before Constantine's time which was how his wife had come to be a Christian before his conversion (whether his conversion was genuine or political).
"To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible" St. Thomas Aquinas

User avatar
Elessarina
Bearer of Anduril
Bearer of Anduril
Posts: 9517
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:12 pm
About me: The Fastest Ratz.. apparently
Location: Rivendell
Contact:

Re: Hello

Post by Elessarina » Sat Mar 06, 2010 8:30 pm

Theophilus wrote:
Yes they do (the Gospels clearly describe supernatural events, and they are clearly documents written long ago in history), you may just choose to work from a presupposition that the supernatural events can't be real, but that is a case of reading your own presuppositions into the documents (which we all do, me included) :biggrin:

Sorry i wored that badly as i am doing about 4 things. Either way there is no proof of the events of the gospels for example other than the gospels themselves or other events of the Bible. There is no evidence.

User avatar
Theophilus
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:09 am
Contact:

Re: Hello

Post by Theophilus » Sat Mar 06, 2010 8:36 pm

there is no proof of the events of the gospels for example other than the gospels themselves
Well, outside the Gospels you also have the epistles of Paul, Peter, James and John. So I would say the evidence extends outside of the Gospels. And then outside of Holy Scripture you also have the very early writings (contemporary with the Gospels and the epistles) such as the letters of Ignatius of Antioch and the early Church writings in the Didache, so the ancient manuscripts (which I would say are evidence) extend beyond the Gospels and then extend beyond the canonized scripture.

But I'm wondering if we're conflating evidence and proof in this discussion? I personally would hold the two separate. I would like to be clear here that what I am offering is evidence, and not proof.
"To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible" St. Thomas Aquinas

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests