Jesus is reported to have said: " Thomas, because you have seen me, you have believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."
In what way is believing without seeing commendable? One can certainly accept accounts of things we have not seen but why would this be a virtue.
We could accept the man at the door is an official without seeing his badge. Or we could just accept something is scientifically true without proof.
So what, if anything, did Jesus mean when he felt there was something blessed about accepting what we have heard without seeing it? Was it wise to suggest this?
Is it good to believe on hear say?
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Is it good to believe on hear say?
Post #2[Replying to post 1 by marco]
I know Jesus was applying his words to the local situation of believing things about him. Jesus thinks that when a story is told about his returning from the dead it is not necessary to see for oneself: one should just accept it.
Some folk said Christ blasphemed; others might have condemned his intemperate behaviour in the Temple. Would it be good to believe these reports without having seen exactly what had been said, or taken place?
I know Jesus was applying his words to the local situation of believing things about him. Jesus thinks that when a story is told about his returning from the dead it is not necessary to see for oneself: one should just accept it.
Some folk said Christ blasphemed; others might have condemned his intemperate behaviour in the Temple. Would it be good to believe these reports without having seen exactly what had been said, or taken place?
-
Tcg
- Savant
- Posts: 8739
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
- Location: Third Stone
- Has thanked: 2279 times
- Been thanked: 2408 times
Re: Is it good to believe on hear say?
Post #3[Replying to post 1 by marco]
It's almost as if Jesus, or whomever created these words, was providing a little gift for those who accept this story without question. They could feel a bit of pride and perhaps joy that unlike Thomas, they believe based only on hear say. They wouldn't think of it that way of course, but that's what it is.
They could view themselves as being part of a special group. These words of course also help take the focus off of the need for evidence. This is most convenient when pushing evidence free dogma.
Tcg
It's almost as if Jesus, or whomever created these words, was providing a little gift for those who accept this story without question. They could feel a bit of pride and perhaps joy that unlike Thomas, they believe based only on hear say. They wouldn't think of it that way of course, but that's what it is.
They could view themselves as being part of a special group. These words of course also help take the focus off of the need for evidence. This is most convenient when pushing evidence free dogma.
Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
-
1213
- Savant
- Posts: 13597
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
- Location: Finland
- Has thanked: 519 times
- Been thanked: 518 times
Re: Is it good to believe on hear say?
Post #5If I would do so, I would believe what atheists say, and I think that would not be good.marco wrote: In what way is believing without seeing commendable?
Maybe it is about how well person can see does someone lie or not. I dont trust to all people, but I believe some people, even if I have not seen what they say they have seen.marco wrote:So what, if anything, did Jesus mean when he felt there was something blessed about accepting what we have heard without seeing it? Was it wise to suggest this?
My new book can be read freely from here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view
Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view
Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html
Re: Is it good to believe on hear say?
Post #6[Replying to post 2 by marco]
You mentioned what you called Jesus' intemperate behaviour in the Temple. I have always doubted that such a thing ever happened as I find it hard to believe that all the money changers and those selling animals would just stand back and let one man wreak havoc. Jesus would have been well outnumbered and I'm sure that those selling their wares would have had not only a numerical advantage, but also some kind of weapon to protect their property. It doesn't make sense to believe that they would simply run away.
You mentioned what you called Jesus' intemperate behaviour in the Temple. I have always doubted that such a thing ever happened as I find it hard to believe that all the money changers and those selling animals would just stand back and let one man wreak havoc. Jesus would have been well outnumbered and I'm sure that those selling their wares would have had not only a numerical advantage, but also some kind of weapon to protect their property. It doesn't make sense to believe that they would simply run away.
Re: Is it good to believe on hear say?
Post #7And there, 1213, lie many pitfalls. A fond mother who has known her son for thirty years might not believe he is capable of murder. Faith and love make us blind, to our danger and disappointment.1213 wrote:
Maybe it is about how well person can see does someone lie or not. I dont trust to all people, but I believe some people, even if I have not seen what they say they have seen.
If some 19th century theologian started a new Christianity, claiming to have instructions directly from the Bible, would it be good to follow him, as many do? Christ was obviously speaking for this particular instance, but his generalisation is wrong. He does occasionally make mistakes.
Re: Is it good to believe on hear say?
Post #8That's a fine observation and it answers the question: "Is it good to believe on hear-say?" We've heard the story but it would be foolish to believe it actually happened. This applies to so many of the stories in the Bible. It is wise to be questioning and critical.sorrento wrote: [Replying to post 2 by marco]
You mentioned what you called Jesus' intemperate behaviour in the Temple. I have always doubted that such a thing ever happened as I find it hard to believe that all the money changers and those selling animals would just stand back and let one man wreak havoc. Jesus would have been well outnumbered and I'm sure that those selling their wares would have had not only a numerical advantage, but also some kind of weapon to protect their property. It doesn't make sense to believe that they would simply run away.
-
The Tanager
- Savant
- Posts: 6239
- Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
- Has thanked: 90 times
- Been thanked: 275 times
Post #9
The people the author is writing this to would not have seen Jesus' resurrected body. This fact alone would not be a good enough reason, by itself, to doubt Jesus' resurrection. There is no mention or necessary implication that these people believe (or should believe) the resurrection occurred blindly. To disbelieve simply because one did not see Jesus' raised body would not be a virtue.
-
bluegreenearth
- Guru
- Posts: 2171
- Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:06 pm
- Location: Manassas, VA
- Has thanked: 983 times
- Been thanked: 657 times
Post #10
Is this to suggest that belief in the resurrection is justified until the claim can be disproven?The Tanager wrote: The people the author is writing this to would not have seen Jesus' resurrected body. This fact alone would not be a good enough reason, by itself, to doubt Jesus' resurrection. There is no mention or necessary implication that these people believe (or should believe) the resurrection occurred blindly. To disbelieve simply because one did not see Jesus' raised body would not be a virtue.
