volition said:
It looks an awful lot like you're trying to make it look like Jesus is 'better' than these so called 'perfect imams'.
See, I don't have to actually accept that Jesus WAS the son of God, even if I accept that Jesus existed. So, really, to me, Jesus could just be 'any other guy claiming to be guided by god', which brings me back to what I was saying earlier. Why believe Jesus and not the 12 imams? They still act based from the 'same authority' (at least from our perspective, even if one of them is 'better' than the other, we have no way of knowing)
In that case, i'd say I couldnt tell you why you should believe Jesus over the Imams. It is not in my ability to get you to a point where you can accept Jesus is the Son of God. As i said at the beginning of this thread, I cannot convince you of God's existance because only he can do that.
Ultimately, I'd have to say look at the teachings of both Jesus and Mohummed. Both are supposedly representing a perfect God. Which of these men's teachings are consistant with God's perfection? How does God deal justly with all people? How are their disciples called to live?
For the teachings of Jesus, The Gospel of Mark is a good place to start (it's pretty short). If you've already read that and want something meatier, then Romans is a good book to see how Christianity is supposed to work. I'm not saying reading these books will change your life. But they're good for understanding what we believe.
volition said:
My point here might not be as strong, but in at least some branches of Christianity, we go to priests for guidance don't we? Priests are human just like us, and yet they are able to 'forgive us' for our sins through confession.
I think it's a valid point, and a good one too, but I can't argue that because it is not Christianity. The christian belief is that there is one God and one mediator between man and God, Jesus. Therefore the priest are not able to forgive our sins because they are not God's mediators. Again, I don't see why you would go to someone who is just as sinful as yourself for guidance on how not to sin.
The only other way i can think of how your point could work is that lots of christians ask their ministers for advice on issues they have. In that sense they seek guidance from people. But really they are seeking God's guidance through someone they consider is more godly then themselves (which is not really true).
BUT one of the gifts of the Spirit for pastors and teachers is that they can speak God's words. Their advice that they give is not their own, but God ministering to the other persons heart. In the end, this advice can really boil down to God saying to the person "Seek me in this matter. Come to me and I will give you rest"
volition said:
What do you mean when you say 'we can go to God himself' for guidance? Have you ever heard God himself speak to you? What made you sure it was God?
I mean that there is no other person we have to go to to have God hear us, or to tell us what God has to say. Because of what Jesus has done, you can have a one on one relationship with God because the sin that seperated you from him has been dealt with. His Spirit is his guide for Christians.
By being able to go to God for guidance I mean that there is no barrier in the way of being able to understand God's will for your life. No hurdle you must jump and no special thing you have to do. All the resources necessary for God to guide you are at your disposal.
You have the bible, the Word of God (or in other words: What God has to say to you). You have God's Spirit to interpret his Word. And you have prayer, so you can interact in your relationship with God. That is all you need!
So in answer to your question, no I have not "heard" God speak, but he does speak through his word. And his Spirit convicts me of what he says and my response to that conviction is to talk to him.
davin said:
Considering there are theories that one was very much a source for the others, it really doesn't add all that much credibility in that sense. Also, it could still have been made up by a handful of people still....no verification there WERE 4 authors, and really, the deciples could've been 4 friends that decided to get together and write their own versions of the whole thing.
Well, considering the "theory" that Mark is the book that the others copied... it wouldnt make much sense. Especially since Mark most likely wrote his gospel from what Peter had taught in the church at his house. That is not the silly thing though. The silly thing is that Matthew and John are believed to have been written by Jesus disciples.
So the theory means that the two of Jesus disciples based their gospels on what Mark said that Peter said that Jesus said. Which would make sense if they couldnt possibly skip out the two middle men and go straight to what Jesus said to them.
On top of that, Luke, a gentile doctor, would have come in no contact with a letter about Jesus from Jerusalem. He came from Colosse which is pretty much in the mid west of Turkey and a place where no jew (or jewish christian for that matter) would find themself. That is until Paul went there. And that's the only way Luke heard the Gospel.
I can understand what you are saying about there possibly being more than four authors. Sometimes people shared the dictation of the contents of a book.
But the thing i was saying about the four stories adding more credibility is what slows the theory that 4 friends wrote them. If 4 people wrote stories that were pretty much the same, then it would be a little sus. But if 4 people wrote stories that were similar but had differences, it's more likely they wrote the books by themselves.
