Christianity

[Fairy]

AI Overview

The statement "if you look in the mirror you will see a reflection of god" is a metaphorical expression, often used in a religious context to emphasize the divine image within humanity, urging self-reflection and recognizing one's inherent worth and potential.
Here's a deeper look at the concept:
Biblical Context:
The Bible uses the metaphor of a mirror to represent the Word of God, which reveals our true selves and God's image within us.
Self-Reflection:
Looking in a mirror encourages introspection and self-awareness, prompting us to examine our actions, thoughts, and character.
Divine Image:
The idea that we reflect God's image is a core concept in many religions, suggesting that we are created in God's likeness and possess inherent dignity and value.
Transformative Power:
By recognizing our divine potential, we can strive to live in a way that reflects God's love and compassion, leading to personal transformation and growth.

Examples in Scripture:
1 Corinthians 13:12: "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face".
James 1:23-24: "For whoever looks at himself in a mirror and forgets what he is, is like a man who looks at his own face in a mirror and forgets what he is".

Beyond Religion:
Even outside of religious contexts, the concept of seeing ourselves in a mirror can be a powerful tool for self-discovery and growth.

[Fairy]

AI Overview



“Marcus Aurelius's writings, particularly in "Meditations," explore the nature of the divine and human agency, suggesting that focusing on virtue and inner strength is more important than fearing or praying to gods for external outcomes.
Here are some key quotes and themes related to his views on God/the divine:
Virtue over Divine Intervention:
Instead of praying for specific outcomes, Aurelius encourages focusing on cultivating virtue and accepting what is beyond one's control.
Example: "The gods either have power or they have not. If they have not, why pray to them? If they have, then instead of praying to be granted or spared such-and-such a thing, why not rather pray to be delivered from dreading it, or lusting for it, or grieving over it?"
Living a Good Life:
Aurelius emphasizes the importance of living a virtuous life, suggesting that if there are gods, they would value virtue over mere piety.
Example: "Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them."
Inner Strength and Acceptance:
Aurelius stresses the importance of finding strength within oneself and accepting the natural order of the universe, rather than relying on external forces or divine intervention.
Example: "You have power over your mind - not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength."
The Nature of the Divine:
Aurelius seems to suggest that the divine is not necessarily a being that intervenes in human affairs, but rather a force or principle that governs the universe.
Example: "If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones."
Focus on the Present:
Aurelius encourages living in the present moment and making the most of the time one has, rather than worrying about the future or past.
Example: "Do not act as if you were going to live ten thousand years. Death hangs over you. While you live, while it is in your power, be good.”

[Belinda]

Attofishpi, you are two separate personas.

How so? ..this could go either way.

I believe in a form of God. The form of God I believe in is :

* what exists is a coherent system .

<edit>
Is this coherent GOD system such that it has the quality of being an intelligence that can reason and comprehend the universe, comprehend itself?

* humans may never understand the whole of the coherent system, but there are wise men such as Copernicus, Jesus, Buddha, Nietzsche, Higgs, Spinoza, and many others who delineate ways we may harmonise with reality.

I agree. Obviously the most unique, especially to me as a Christian (* unique form in my own right) is Jesus.

Jesus of Nazareth is the unique interpreter of God, as far as Christians are concerned. Atto ,you say this is obvious. But it is not obvious. What did Jesus do that Socrates did not ?

True, Jesus fulfilled the OT prophecies of former generations of Jews. How then did Jesus and his Jewish sect become so important to contemporary Europeans who were pagans not Jews?

-------------------------

You asked an interesting question and I am not answering it in this post because the matter I did address is enough for one post.

[attofishpi]

Attofishpi, you are two separate personas.

How so? ..this could go either way.

I believe in a form of God. The form of God I believe in is :

* what exists is a coherent system .

<edit>
Is this coherent GOD system such that it has the quality of being an intelligence that can reason and comprehend the universe, comprehend itself?

* humans may never understand the whole of the coherent system, but there are wise men such as Copernicus, Jesus, Buddha, Nietzsche, Higgs, Spinoza, and many others who delineate ways we may harmonise with reality.

I agree. Obviously the most unique, especially to me as a Christian (* unique form in my own right) is Jesus.

Jesus of Nazareth is the unique interpreter of God, as far as Christians are concerned. Atto ,you say this is obvious. But it is not obvious. What did Jesus do that Socrates did not ?

Need I answer that with any serious bone in my being?

Socrates did not claim a direct lineage to the DIVINE. Socrates, as wise as he was particularly for the time period, always maintained not simply accepting what we perceive in ANY way, but to question everything. (* I attempt the same from my personal empirical experience - I am not certain GOD is not merely an A.I. and i refuse to cower to Biblical nonsense.)

Jesus and Socrates were fathoms apart with respect to the intelligence and comprehension of that which is GOD or "GOD" - A/I

True, Jesus fulfilled the OT prophecies of former generations of Jews. How then did Jesus and his Jewish sect become so important to contemporary Europeans who were pagans not Jews?

That could be dependent on many things since the early advent of what developed as Christianity. (*and not least the intelligence GOD operating throughout ALL matter sub Planck scale).

As far as I am aware there are accounts of pagans receiving divine revelation directing them to the knowledge of the life, death, resurrection of Christ. Constantine being a prime example.

You asked an interesting question and I am not answering it in this post because the matter I did address is enough for one post.

What was the interesting question that you are withholding an answer of?

[Belinda]

How so? ..this could go either way.




<edit>
Is this coherent GOD system such that it has the quality of being an intelligence that can reason and comprehend the universe, comprehend itself?






I agree. Obviously the most unique, especially to me as a Christian (* unique form in my own right) is Jesus.

Jesus of Nazareth is the unique interpreter of God, as far as Christians are concerned. Atto ,you say this is obvious. But it is not obvious. What did Jesus do that Socrates did not ?

Need I answer that with any serious bone in my being?

Socrates did not claim a direct lineage to the DIVINE. Socrates, as wise as he was particularly for the time period, always maintained not simply accepting what we perceive in ANY way, but to question everything. (* I attempt the same from my personal empirical experience - I am not certain GOD is not merely an A.I. and i refuse to cower to Biblical nonsense.)

Jesus and Socrates were fathoms apart with respect to the intelligence and comprehension of that which is GOD or "GOD" - A/I

True, Jesus fulfilled the OT prophecies of former generations of Jews. How then did Jesus and his Jewish sect become so important to contemporary Europeans who were pagans not Jews?

That could be dependent on many things since the early advent of what developed as Christianity. (*and not least the intelligence GOD operating throughout ALL matter sub Planck scale).

As far as I am aware there are accounts of pagans receiving divine revelation directing them to the knowledge of the life, death, resurrection of Christ. Constantine being a prime example.

You asked an interesting question and I am not answering it in this post because the matter I did address is enough for one post.

What was the interesting question that you are withholding an answer of?

The "direct lineage to the divine " that Jesus claimed was the Jewish lineage back to the royal house of David. Also, Jesus was a Jew so he believed that a Messiah would arrive to lead the Jews. The OT prophets had already foretold a Messiah, and Jesus claimed to be He. This was a fair enough claim for Jews. But how could this affect non-Jews?

Your belief, Atto, in "pagans receiving divine revelation" is a mystical belief. The study of philosophy does not fit with mysticism. Mystics of all religious backgrounds tend to be good people , not dogmatic or cruel. However I have no mystical experience and so I can't discuss it with you.

Socrates lived and died rather as Jesus did, i.e.true to truth and reason, and courageous to the end, a martyr to the cause of truth and reason.

The "direct lineage to the divine " applied therefor to Jews and only to Jews, so how does the claim of Jesus to be the Jewish Messiah and King concern modern Christians?

The "God system" is far too complex and enormous for any human to comprehend. That is why humans need wise men, prophets , artists, philosophers, and scientists to interpret. Indeed the interpretation of Allah was and still is the rationale for Muslim scientists including during the largely Christian Middle Ages in Europe.

Christianity is embedded in history. History is the story of man's past.

[attofishpi]

The "direct lineage to the divine " that Jesus claimed was the Jewish lineage back to the royal house of David. Also, Jesus was a Jew so he believed that a Messiah would arrive to lead the Jews.

Now there's one of those non-sequiturs that I mentioned troubles me about your analysis of thangs.

Just because Jesus was born a Jew, does not mean that he did not know himself to be the Messiah "that would arrive to lead the Jews"

The way you addressed that above, it appears you are implying simply for being born a Jew that he then believed "a Messiah would arrive to lead the Jews" as if that Messiah was some other dude!

Do you understand the point I am making?

The OT prophets had already foretold a Messiah, and Jesus claimed to be He. This was a fair enough claim for Jews. But how could this affect non-Jews?

Your belief, Atto, in "pagans receiving divine revelation" is a mystical belief. The study of philosophy does not fit with mysticism.

Actually it does per:-

mysticism
noun [ U ] religion
uk /ˈmɪs.tɪ.sɪ.zəm/ us /ˈmɪs.tə.sɪ.zəm/

The belief that there is hidden meaning in life or that each human being can unite with God.

If according to you:- "The study of philosophy does not fit with mysticism."

Then why have "philosophers" spent so much effort pondering over the above definition of mysticism?

Mystics of all religious backgrounds tend to be good people , not dogmatic or cruel. However I have no mystical experience and so I can't discuss it with you.

OF course you can discuss mysticism with me. You have already declared GOD to be part of your comprehension of "what exists is a coherent system".

The fact that you have experienced a lack of discernible alteration to what one normally perceives of reality to make any claim to mystical experience, does not preclude you from discussing.

What is stopping you, is an internal conflict of opinion based on lack of empirical evidence, and that is justified, but certainly NOT justified where PHILOSOPHY is concerned.

Socrates lived and died rather as Jesus did, i.e.true to truth and reason, and courageous to the end, a martyr to the cause of truth and reason.

YEP.

The "direct lineage to the divine " applied therefor to Jews and only to Jews, so how does the claim of Jesus to be the Jewish Messiah and King concern modern Christians?

When I stated "The direct lineage" wasn't a DNA thing. It had nothing to do with Jews - the people that Jesus the Christ was born into. I wanted you to infer the difference being that Christ was OF GOD whereas you compared him to Socrates with the same measure.

No. When I was in India my 80 year old cousin, that ..i love to bits, made a statement from the Bible pertaining to Jesus only being FOR the Jews, and I interrogated that within the Bible, and emailed him my reply - he was about four doors across in the hotel, I think he comprehended my point. So if that's the part of the NT angle you are aiming with, bring it out.

The "God system" is far too complex and enormous for any human to comprehend. That is why humans need wise men, prophets , artists, philosophers, and scientists to interpret. Indeed the interpretation of Allah was and still is the rationale for Muslim scientists including during the largely Christian Middle Ages in Europe.

Christianity is embedded in history. History is the story of man's past.

..Precisely and that is getting back to my main argument of English having key words that via comprehension of cumulative evidence are so remotely unlikely to have evolved naturally via natural language etymology...investigate the root of the word HISTORY.

HIS_STORY

Y?

https://www.androcies.com/Images/Art/Ch ... 20Time.jpg

www.androcies.com <--- eventually my website may impart the epiphany you deserve.

[Age]

The "direct lineage to the divine " that Jesus claimed was the Jewish lineage back to the royal house of David. Also, Jesus was a Jew so he believed that a Messiah would arrive to lead the Jews.

Now there's one of those non-sequiturs that I mentioned troubles me about your analysis of thangs.

Just because Jesus was born a Jew, does not mean that he did not know himself to be the Messiah "that would arrive to lead the Jews"

The way you addressed that above, it appears you are implying simply for being born a Jew that he then believed "a Messiah would arrive to lead the Jews" as if that Messiah was some other dude!

Do you understand the point I am making?

The OT prophets had already foretold a Messiah, and Jesus claimed to be He. This was a fair enough claim for Jews. But how could this affect non-Jews?

Your belief, Atto, in "pagans receiving divine revelation" is a mystical belief. The study of philosophy does not fit with mysticism.

Actually it does per:-

mysticism
noun [ U ] religion
uk /ˈmɪs.tɪ.sɪ.zəm/ us /ˈmɪs.tə.sɪ.zəm/

The belief that there is hidden meaning in life or that each human being can unite with God.

If according to you:- "The study of philosophy does not fit with mysticism."

Then why have "philosophers" spent so much effort pondering over the above definition of mysticism?

Mystics of all religious backgrounds tend to be good people , not dogmatic or cruel. However I have no mystical experience and so I can't discuss it with you.

OF course you can discuss mysticism with me. You have already declared GOD to be part of your comprehension of "what exists is a coherent system".

The fact that you have experienced a lack of discernible alteration to what one normally perceives of reality to make any claim to mystical experience, does not preclude you from discussing.

What is stopping you, is an internal conflict of opinion based on lack of empirical evidence, and that is justified, but certainly NOT justified where PHILOSOPHY is concerned.

Socrates lived and died rather as Jesus did, i.e.true to truth and reason, and courageous to the end, a martyr to the cause of truth and reason.

YEP.

The "direct lineage to the divine " applied therefor to Jews and only to Jews, so how does the claim of Jesus to be the Jewish Messiah and King concern modern Christians?

When I stated "The direct lineage" wasn't a DNA thing. It had nothing to do with Jews - the people that Jesus the Christ was born into. I wanted you to infer the difference being that Christ was OF GOD whereas you compared him to Socrates with the same measure.

No. When I was in India my 80 year old cousin, that ..i love to bits, made a statement from the Bible pertaining to Jesus only being FOR the Jews, and I interrogated that within the Bible, and emailed him my reply - he was about four doors across in the hotel, I think he comprehended my point. So if that's the part of the NT angle you are aiming with, bring it out.

The "God system" is far too complex and enormous for any human to comprehend. That is why humans need wise men, prophets , artists, philosophers, and scientists to interpret. Indeed the interpretation of Allah was and still is the rationale for Muslim scientists including during the largely Christian Middle Ages in Europe.

Christianity is embedded in history. History is the story of man's past.

..Precisely and that is getting back to my main argument of English having key words that via comprehension of cumulative evidence are so remotely unlikely to have evolved naturally via natural language etymology...investigate the root of the word HISTORY.

HIS_STORY

Y?

https://www.androcies.com/Images/Art/Ch ... 20Time.jpg

www.androcies.com <--- eventually my website may impart the epiphany you deserve.

Investigate the root of the word MYSTERY.

MY_STORY.

BE_CAUSE.

[attofishpi]

Investigate the root of the word MYSTERY.

MY_STORY.

No phonetic resemblance, unfortunately.

BE_CAUSE.

Yes, I have sussed the word because - everything has a because until you regress backwards in the reverse of causality until pure random chaos is apparent as the beginning.

Ergo, no infinite regress is an issue.

[Age]

Investigate the root of the word MYSTERY.

MY_STORY.

No phonetic resemblance, unfortunately.

IF, and WHEN, 'you' ALSO COME-TO-KNOW thy Self, then 'you' WILL ALSO UNDERSTAND WHO and HOW ALL-OF-THIS IS MY STORY.

In other words WHEN the 'mysteries' ARE ALSO REVEALED TO 'you', human beings, then there are NO mysteries, and ONLY MY story.

But, AND AGAIN, you people, here, in this forum, are, STILL, A LONG WAY OFF.

BE_CAUSE.

Yes, I have sussed the word because - everything has a because until you regress backwards in the reverse of causality until pure random chaos is apparent as the beginning.

Ergo, no infinite regress is an issue.

What 'beginning'?

There is NO 'beginning', and, there was NO 'end'.

[iambiguous]

Just for the record...

I posted my own in-depth reaction to attofishpi above.

Oh, you have an audience! Well good for you.

Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle?

You'll either respond to the points I raised above, or you won't. Then we can allow anyone here who chooses to follow our exchange to decide for themselves who does the most wiggling.

Click, of course.

He or she then simply ignored all of the points I raised in order to focus entirely on the Shroud of Turin.

Shroud of Turin – Dr John Campbell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT1R2kDPHFA&t=0s

Yes, the shroud of Turin is THE most important artifact of physical proof of anything pertaining to a miracle. Thus, of such importance to your quest for evidence of GOD, especially the Christian GOD - that I insisted you watch it prior to my reply to your earlier post.

Really, think about it. An omnipotent Christian God could easily provide mere mortals with evidence or artifacts or personal experiences such that around the globe men and women would look like fools if they did not accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior. Instead, He leaves them a shroud!

A shroud such that if you Google "is the shroud of Turin real?", you are deluged with all manner of conflicting accounts. Same with things like the Holy Grail or the Ark of the Covenant.

https://www.google.com/search?q=is+the+ ... s-wiz-serp

As I once noted, "I'm reminded of that scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark...a warehouse and a crate with a swastika on it. We watch as [supposedly] God burns it away. Take that you Nazis!"

Even IF the shroud was a 15 Century forgery - scientists admit we couldn't recreate the grayscale information that is embedded as the image even with todays tech.

And just as I asked IC to note the most potent evidence provided in the RF/WLC videos, I'm asking you to note the same from this video.

Again, I want to be saved. I want to be provided with the sort of evidence that might convince me to jettison my truly grim philosophy of life "here and now".

If you watched the video and noted the key findings from the scientific analysis as I expressed above, you'd comprehend that it's mere existence is a miracle.

Of course, that's what IC suggested in regard to the RF videos, isn't it? And why do I suspect that any number of folks on their very own "my way or the highway" One True Paths here are likely to steer the infidels to their very own social media/YouTube videos.

Scientists admit that they could not even reproduce the artifact using today's technology.

On the other hand, if it is unequivocally true that science today still fails to replicate it, "to reproduce the artifact using today's technology" please link me to the arguments, the evidence, the bottom line, etc., that convinced you of this.

That would certainly interest me.

On the other hand...

https://www.skeptic.com/article/shroud- ... -examined/
https://www.shroud.com/bar.htm

"The cloth of the Shroud can be assigned with a confidence of 95 percent to a date between 1260 and 1390 CE."

But then back to the part where, okay, the Christian God is in fact the Creator of all things.

Including these things:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_earthquakes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_l ... _eruptions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... l_cyclones
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tsunamis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landslides
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fires
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_epidemics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_floods
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... ore_deaths
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_diseases
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extinction_events

GOD creates planet Earth, set it in motion.

Again, in my view, this is but one more thing you believe is true "in your head" about God. Now, I can't demonstrate that it is false, of course, but then [as always] back to the argument that it is far more incumbent upon those who believe that something is true to demonstrate that first.

A planet by its nature of mass creates great heat within its core and mantle, such that the cooler parts, the crust where we all hang out, sits floating upon this magma. The outer area of the planet know as the atmosphere is gaseous and also subject to natural causal forces, they provide weather patterns.

Okay, then you seem to be suggesting that God created planet Earth such that His creation is necessarily in sync with the laws of nature, rather than a God capable of actually inventing nature itself?

On the other hand, how would a No God cosmos go about creating the laws of matter? With God, there's teleology. So, how about with nature?

The GOD that I have deduced since its introduction to me in 1997, is an intelligence operating from below the Planck scale. It exists throughout all matter. People die, people have some suffering on the way to death from natural catastrophes - life on Earth is indeed a struggle.

Go into more detail regarding this "introduction". How did it commence and then unfold? Aside from what you tell yourself about it in a "world of words" here, what actual substantive, authentic and corroborative evidence do you have?

The great thing about the omnipotence of this GOD entity (*while choosing to remain imperceptible to us, for good reason) IS that GOD can minimise the suffering of people in great natural catastrophes - indeed, snatch their souls prior to great suffering.

That's simply preposterous, in my view, given any number of particularly agonizing contexts above in which the "act of God" itself is the source of all the terrible pain and suffering.

And, again, unlike Jesus Christ who "as God in the flesh" was fully aware that Heaven [immortality/salvation] was right around the corner for Him, almost all the rest of us are left grappling with existential leaps of faith or wagers. Also, knowing that there are many, many other religious denominations "out there" who are quite adamant that only their own One True Path counts.

These people that were unfortunate to have their current lives taken early, are reincarnated - depending on the way they have lived their life, perhaps they will be reincarnated into a position on the Earth where such natural disasters are not as likely.

Over and again: with so much that is at stake on both sides of the grave, why does God leave you suggesting that "perhaps" one thing rather than another is true?

[attofishpi]

Shroud of Turin – Dr John Campbell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT1R2kDPHFA&t=0s

The shroud of Turin is THE most important artifact of physical proof of anything pertaining to a miracle. Thus, of such importance to your quest for evidence of GOD, especially the Christian GOD - that I insisted you watch it prior to my reply to your earlier post.

Really, think about it. An omnipotent Christian God could easily provide mere mortals with evidence or artifacts or personal experiences such that around the globe men and women would look like fools if they did not accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior. Instead, He leaves them a shroud!

As I stated in my previous reply to you, that this GOD entity may have a great reason NOT to make its existence obvious to everyone such that all humanity are left with NO doubt.

I am happy to discuss my theory on that if you wish.

Even IF the shroud is a 1260-1390 AD forgery - scientists are baffled as to how in that time period grayscale information that is embedded as the image could have been produced, especially with enough grayscale to permit a 3D image with todays tech - see my comments below..

Scientists admit that they could not even reproduce the artifact using today's technology.

On the other hand, if it is unequivocally true that science today still fails to replicate it, "to reproduce the artifact using today's technology" please link me to the arguments, the evidence, the bottom line, etc., that convinced you of this.

The evidence is explained in the video. The reason I insist on this video is because it has footage of microscopic analysis among other things that show the fibres and how they have individually been radiated.

From your google link:-

Carbon-14 Dating:
In 1988, an international team of scientists performed radiocarbon dating on the shroud, concluding that it was not from the time of Christ's crucifixion (1st century AD) but from the medieval period (1260-1390 AD).


My points are:-
1. Even if that date is accurate (as it was taken from a repair done since the shroud had been burnt at around that date) this is long before photography. The image IS a negative image of photographic quality.

2. The radiation image on the shroud has now been found with current technology to have grayscale (hue) changes with enough information that NASA technology has been used and has shown that the image is a 3D image of a body in rigor-mortis.

3. This was my google search regarding more recent scientific analysis of the sample that had the dates at (1260-1390 AD):-



From google:

Laser Experiments:
In 2011, researchers from the European Nuclear Energy Agency (ENEA) successfully replicated the shallow depth and coloration of the Shroud image using a 40-nanosecond burst from an ultraviolet excimer laser on raw linen fabrics.

Mechanism:
The laser pulses scorched the fabric with similar microscopic properties to the Shroud, creating a permanent coloration, but only penetrating the required 0.2–0.4 microns of the 300 micron wide cellulose fibers.

Implications:
This research suggests that a short, intense burst of ultraviolet radiation could have created the image on the Shroud.

Origin of the Image:
The researchers propose that the image may have been formed by a "flash of light" or a similar phenomenon, but the exact mechanism and technology used at the time of the Shroud's creation remain a mystery.

The great thing about the omnipotence of this GOD entity (*while choosing to remain imperceptible to us, for good reason) IS that GOD can minimise the suffering of people in great natural catastrophes - indeed, snatch their souls prior to great suffering.

That's simply preposterous,

And thereeth lieth the end of the sermon.

You want to believe that there is an omnipotent GOD, but scoff at what I know IS plausible with this entity. There is no point to this discussion.

There is simply NO chance any evidence presented to you that GOD has made available, will be able to convince you of what I stated in the quote above.

[Belinda]

Jesus of Nazareth was an orthodox Jew so he believed that the Jewish messiah would be born of the house of King David, through the paternal lineage. The Gospels vary as to Jesus' personal belief as to whether or not he was himself the Messiah.

Christians consider the Messiah to be a spiritual not a literal messiah.

BTW,' messiah 'and 'christ ' mean the same . The two words come from different languages but they refer to the same idea.

The point is academic, and does not affect how Christianity may be taught as a reasonable faith.

To teach Christianity as a reasonable faith it must be taught without
miracles or a version of God who intervenes in history.

[phyllo]

To teach Christianity as a reasonable faith it must be taught without
miracles or a version of God who intervenes in history.

But then a lot of the events in the New Testament didn't happen. And some of the things that Jesus allegedly said are false.

So which of Jesus' statements are to be believed?

[Belinda]

To teach Christianity as a reasonable faith it must be taught without
miracles or a version of God who intervenes in history.

But then a lot of the events in the New Testament didn't happen. And some of the things that Jesus allegedly said are false.

So which of Jesus' statements are to be believed?

Scholars used a combination of linguistics, anthropology, and history to discover which of Jesus'sayings actually came from Jesus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Seminar

[phyllo]

To teach Christianity as a reasonable faith it must be taught without
miracles or a version of God who intervenes in history.

But then a lot of the events in the New Testament didn't happen. And some of the things that Jesus allegedly said are false.

So which of Jesus' statements are to be believed?

Scholars used a combination of linguistics, anthropology, and history to discover which of Jesus'sayings actually came from Jesus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Seminar

That's not the point.

If God doesn't intervene in history, then God is not giving the prophets or Jesus any special information. Therefore, everything that they say must originate from their daily experiences.

Yet Jesus says many things about God and the afterlife which he could not possibly know unless he has some special access to it. If that is removed from the religion, as well as the miracles, then there is not much religion left.