[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / acme / animu / arepa / bestemma / clang / leftpol / mde / vg ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?

File: 2ebf01500f881fd⋯.jpeg (129.53 KB, 220x326, 110:163, E97AE5DC-1079-4EDD-B794-3….jpeg)

9905d7  No.691270

I was at the bookstore and saw a lot of people’s attempts to secularize the notion of an afterlife using a lot of theoretical physics babble or some such.

14637d  No.691273

>>691270

Science by nature is confined to the material world, it can not detect anything immaterial, and to say that spiritual things are material (like if someone "confirmed" an afterlife by methods of science) is not Christian. Scientist will never detect God materially, nor angels, nor anything spiritual, nor is it supposed to. Science can never contradict Christianity, even though they may try with their inane reductionism.


d51757  No.691302

>>691270

Only if God wants it to. But he never will because he wants the air of mystery to weed out those who follow because they truly believe and those who follow because their is no other option but to believe.


5fdad3  No.691305

>>691302

What’s the difference? Both parties would still seek to do the same things


d51757  No.691311

>>691305

God doesn't want to rule by fear but by love. It's complicated and I am not the right person to discuss this.


9b1a3c  No.691313

>>691270

>Implying Aristotle and Aquinas haven't already done it


f81e73  No.691381

>>691313

I thought Aristotle believed in an impersonal (non-Christian) God or am I mixing him up with someone?


9fdce5  No.691404

>>691311

<God doesn't want to rule by fear

>The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction. ~ Proverbs 1:7


2423cc  No.691406

>>691313

aquinas didn't


d51757  No.691439

>>691404

1 verse of Proverbs of all books proves me wrong

>Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; ~Proverbs 3:5

“There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.” (1 John 4:18).


2423cc  No.691442

>>691404

>>691439

Fear of God is the beginning, but Love of God is the end of the foot-race.


4888d9  No.691445

>>691270

the powers that be will try supress it or cast doubt over it, if we believe in (((conspiracies)))


ac61c0  No.691620

Keep in mind that with scientific proof comes other issues. Remember that there are people who believe that God exists and hate him. While it would be insane to target an entity that created an entire universe with the energy levels Earth presently wields (fossil fuels? plz) I could see some people trying to destroy that universe or at least Humanity/Earth in a mad rage against heaven with their positions ascertained.


c3b4c8  No.695342

File: fc84c78c2a91d68⋯.jpg (17.59 KB, 220x267, 220:267, david hume.jpg)

File: 3c2f2aa4003905b⋯.jpg (18.83 KB, 220x282, 110:141, karl popper.jpg)

File: c94897dd6cb24dd⋯.jpg (187.81 KB, 727x800, 727:800, aquinas.jpg)

>>691270

"No."

"No."

"No."


72eefe  No.695425

>>695358

I don't know if I can trust in that. I feel like I'm in the weird side of youtube when I look that shit up. please post some examples of what you're talking about that are confirmed.


d76b80  No.695439

File: c6c11efa4c72fb5⋯.jpg (18.14 KB, 300x300, 1:1, the-crucifixion-of-jesus-s….jpg)

>>691270

I don't know what you mean by independently but there's a good book by Dr. Zugibe who scientifically proves the passion and the shroud of turim.

The Crucifixion of Jesus, Completely Revised and Expanded: A Forensic Inquiry


d76b80  No.695442

>>695439

it's only through Zugibe's physiological analysis that we can grasp the terrible suffering our Lord went through.


9172fc  No.701339

>>691404

when it says fear it means "respect", God doesn't actually want us to be afraid of him like some serial killer, nor does he want us to think he's a joke and walk all over him


85f500  No.701503

I hate people who say physics explains this and that.

99% of those people are the same people who can't solve a first grade equation.

As a physicist I hope they burn in hell for making my field of study a meme.


beafb1  No.701694

>>695439

The Shroud of Turin is precisely the evidence to invoke among such people, given their fetish for scientism. The standard approach to such questions, however, should be as >>691273 points out.

>Turning to the evidence for the resurrection, we find that the shroud provides three new and very strong arguments for the historicity of this event. First, the cause of the image on the shroud has received much attention. Hundreds of burial shrouds are in existence, but no others to date are known to have an image, but only blood and decomposition stains. To the contrary, the shroud of Turin not only has a double body image (observe and reverse) but there is much evidence that indicates that the image was caused by a burst of light/heat. Although I am not at liberty to discuss the recent experiments on this subject, previously published results reveal the probability of this conclusion. To say the least, a burst of radiation from a dead body that appears to be that of Jesus is very intriguing evidence for the resurrection, especially in light of the historical evidence for this event.

>Second, scientific investigation reveals that there is no decomposition on the shroud, meaning that, in a Middle Eastern environment, the body did not remain in the cloth for more than a very few days. That the body probably identified as that of Jesus did not decompose in this cloth adds to the intrigue.

>However, some may object that there are several possible reasons why a body might have been unwrapped. This is why the third evidence is so strong, since the pathologists examining the shroud found that the man was not unwrapped. The cloth contacted the body and the blood was transmitted directly to it, becoming somewhat attached. Separation in such conditions would involve dislodging a number of dried blood clots and disrupting the dried borders of the stains. However, the blood clots on the shroud are not only intact, being visible in almost every wound, but the borders of the wounds are also uninterrupted. These three points are quite evidential even when taken by themselves.

'27 And he said, 'Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father's house, 28 for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.' 29* But Abraham said, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' 30* And he said, 'No, father Abraham; but if some one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' 31 He said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the dead.'"'

http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/J_Evangelical_Theological_Soc/Habermas_JETS_Shroud-of-Turin-and-significance.htm


1a866c  No.701714

File: aa2a4e78d49e572⋯.png (3.91 MB, 1292x8757, 1292:8757, The Authenticity of the Ho….png)

File: 4598a60e4a8fb59⋯.webm (2.52 MB, 640x352, 20:11, Jesus Christ.webm)

>>701694

You may be interested in some of pic related's links and information; I made that thread back when I was obsessed with the Holy Shroud. I am very blessed to have come across many signs confirming and reinforcing my faith.

Sancte Thoma, ora pro nobis!


beafb1  No.701875

File: 115b15ecf17812c⋯.jpg (349.63 KB, 1100x733, 1100:733, 03diptyc.jpg)

>>701714

I am, thanks! Learned some new things about it. Saved.

Ad majorem Dei gloriam.


accd64  No.711676

Not when you have people like Dawkins saying that he would outright reject even obvious proof of God's existence because he would chalk it up to ayy lmaos instead.


ce3f88  No.712097

>>711676

funnily enough this is a fantastic argument to use on fedoras. next time they say there's no evidence of God, if you can get them to answer (most of them are cowards and will never answer) ask them what sort of evidence would be okay, even say you can show them but you want to know what would be acceptable first, based on their logic. You can even claim that you will pray to God and He could very well do it, but you need to figure out what to pray to God for first.

They literally cannot come up with anything that would convince them based on their logic. Your name in the sky? ayy lmaos are more likely than some all powerful being that I can communicate with right? money in your bank account? isn't it more likely i can hack into it than an omniscient all powerful being that exists that i can communicate with? and so on, they literally based on their idiotic logic, can come up with nothing that would actually convince them that God exists. So while you can (actually legitimately claim) that it's very possible you can get God to do a miracle for this person, they can not even come up with one thing that would definitely prove that God exists to them. So if they can't why would you waste your time (or God) to do something if nothing is good enough for them. God appearing - isn't it more likely it's an ayylmao, or I secretly drugged you?

Based on their "Facts and Logic" (tm) (also devoid of any basic philosophy) God cannot exist so literally any other explanation would be more suitable for them. Doesn't matter if you levitate and hadoken the living hell out of that person.

So yeah that Dawkins example is pretty good cause it proves how ridiculous the fedoras are. Believe me you won't even get halfway into this sort of discussion without them skydaddy-posting you out. Logic is the enemy of a fedora.


d2aa91  No.712151

If "atheistic" scientists discovered detailed information on the nature of the Divine, they would either try to bend it to their will or destroy it out of rage. They would fail, of course, but they would bring ruination in the process.


272421  No.712161

File: fa2dc066883b011⋯.jpg (40.22 KB, 800x450, 16:9, ojzvdbcjq4wuvyo6gbj7.jpg)

how could you confirm that God incarnated as a man 2000 years ago, using science (or anything for that matter)??? it's just faith, we don't have to explain sh|t….


e1dc4d  No.712242

>>712151

I used to wonder when first reading the gospels why most of the pharisees continued to reject Christ, having seen these things first hand. Surely they had proof, and knew the risk they were taking by rejecting it? But it's no different to modern atheists. They aren't more logical/intelligent/skeptical etc, they're just more stubborn. Their pride is all they have going for them.


a959f5  No.712351

>religion

Supernatural world

>natural sciences

Natural world.

Is this so hard to understand? If science could replicate Jesus miracles than he was an impostor and no truth abided in him. We know that He is the One He says He is because he made impossible things. It's impossible for a virgin to become pregnant, it's impossible for water to turn into wine, it's impossible to resurrect etc yet he did it.

In fact science proves Christianity exactly by saying the biblical miracles are impossible according to the laws of physics. Otherwise it wouldn't be a miracle.


8982b4  No.712386

>>691270

Perhaps a million years from now they will be able to view history or visit history using some unknown scientific device. Maybe Jesus might get resurrected once more and oh what then?


ed8907  No.712412

>science

>religion

They are one in the same.


5aad02  No.712444

If God wishes it, then it will. If God doesn't, then it won't.

However, every time I felt an impulse to wander from the faith I asked myself whether that came from legitimate reasoning or if that reasoning is just a rationalization of a desire not to believe. More often than not it was the later. And then I wondered if science already doesn't have the tools to confirm the faith but it is hidden because most, like me in my moments of weakness, just prefer not to believe.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / acme / animu / arepa / bestemma / clang / leftpol / mde / vg ]