A focus on proof

[Willum]

Clearly there are "moral stories" written in the Bible from which we can gain insight into various aspects of life. But isn't this true of all human literature? -Divine Insight

As usual DI's insight is divine. But it did bring up the counter-point - for the New Testament.

Aren't the majority of New Testament stores primarily concerned with proving Jesus was valid?
They all seem to be about him being tested and exhibiting power. But wouldn't a real prophet of son of any god's book be less concerned with validating magic trick and more concerned with saving people?

When we present a truth, we provide supporting verifiable evidence.
For example, for E = mc2 of F=ma, we can point to and say, look at the Sun, or throw a ball in the air.

For Jesus all the Bible does is prove Jesus. It doesn't seem to accomplish whatit set out to do.

Take for example other Holy books: Does the Old Testament seek to validate Moses, or any other prophet? No.
Does the Tibetan Book of the Dead or any other?

No, we only have one work of religion thats only purpose seems to be to justify the words of the person it is about.

In summary the Bible is the recordings of Jesus, and all they seem to do is expound the works of Jesus. In other words: Paul/Matthew/etc. said Jesus said Jesus was great.

What made this something other than a dismissable document?

[1213]

Clearly there are "moral stories" written in the Bible from which we can gain insight into various aspects of life. But isn't this true of all human literature? -Divine Insight

As usual DI's insight is divine. But it did bring up the counter-point - for the New Testament.

Aren't the majority of New Testament stores primarily concerned with proving Jesus was valid?
They all seem to be about him being tested and exhibiting power. But wouldn't a real prophet of son of any god's book be less concerned with validating magic trick and more concerned with saving people?
...

What do you mean with saving people?

It seems to me that the goal is to save one’s soul, not body. And for that, I believe the message in the Bible is the right thing.

[JehovahsWitness]

But wouldn't a real prophet of son of any god's book be... concerned with saving people?

Emphasis MINE


The is no "old Testament" that stipulates a Prophet qualifies as such if his message primarily be to "save people" indeed not an insignificant number of them were commissioned to announce people's doom and destruction. Jeremiah, for example, essentially announced the eventual destruction of Jerusalem as did Nahum for Ninevah. Many of the so-called "minor prophets" were sent to pronounce God's displeasure and intention to destroy people's or individuals. Being a God of love there would always be the option is survival for individuals or even entire nations (as with Jonah and the Ninevites) but there is no escaping the fact that most of the Prophets were sent to discipline and occasionally announce a nation's partial or complete annihilation.

Biblically a Prophet qualifies as such if he or she communicated messages from God.


JW


Was Jesus a Prophet?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 002#804002

Did Ezekiel predict the destruction of Tyre?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 368#871368

When was ancient Jerusalem destroyed?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 698#825698

[Willum]

[Replying to post 3 by JehovahsWitness]

Well, that is an excellent form of denial and misconstrue, but you really haven't made any point, or stated anything in the form of debate I can comment on.

Between this and 1213's comment, I think that I have made you realize that the NT, unlike other religious works was written to justify itself. It is a psychological trick, not a religious work.

Not a real one, anyway.

[Jagella]

[Replying to post 1 by Willum]

Aren't the majority of New Testament stores primarily concerned with proving Jesus was valid?
They all seem to be about him being tested and exhibiting power. But wouldn't a real prophet of son of any god's book be less concerned with validating magic trick and more concerned with saving people?

In a bizarre way, Jesus "validation" and his magic tricks are inextricably linked to our being "saved." The logic is that if you can be gullible enough to believe wild stories on scant evidence, then the Bible god will save you. For those of us who think critically, we are doomed to hell.

So yes, I suppose a "real god" or son of such a god would be more concerned with what's best for us and less concerned with getting people to believe he has magical powers. People, on the other hand, might make up stories about magical people from the sky and then demand we believe those stories.