Why does Christianity evolve?

[nobspeople]

Arguably, Christianity was as different, when it originally started amongst the various groups with different ideals, than today's view.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontlin ... rsity.html

Even among modern Christian societies, there are differences (Catholic, Protestant and (Eastern) Orthodox).

If Christianity is so right, so strong, so righteous, so...'God'... one would think it would change its environment and not be changed by its environment.
It seems, at least in America, American society is, in some ways, changing Christianity.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/arti ... he-gospel/
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/christia ... t_b_817102 *

So why does it change over time? Is it 'God's will'? Is it just made up mumbo jumbo? Or do people just not care, anymore?

EDIT: * Forgot to include originally

[JehovahsWitness]

There are no eyewitness accounts of Jesus dead or alive, for that matter.

Did I not just referr to one? I know for a fact that there are eyewitness accounts since I just referred to one.

[JehovahsWitness]

HEARSAY: A written or oral statement made otherwise than by a witness giving their own first-hand evidence in proceedings, which is tendered as evidence of the matters stated and which is relied on in court to prove the truth of the matters stated.

JOHN 21:24

This is the disciple who gives this witness about these things and who wrote these things ...

Yes...

Yes what. "Yes" is an affirmative what are you agreeing to? That the gospel of John is not HEARSAY. Please explain why you said the word "yes" in response To my point regarding HEARSAY.

[JehovahsWitness]

... but who was this disciple? The book of John is anonymous.

So? So what?

A secret witness (or anonymous witness) is a witness which is granted anonymity in a trial by the juridical authority. The identity of the witness is not disclosed to the defendant and the general public except the secret witness agrees to it.


source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_witness

Further Reading
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness

RELATED POSTS

Are the gospels mere hearsay?
viewtopic.php?p=1043571#p1043571

Are the gospel claims substantiated ?
viewtopic.php?p=1041048#p1041048

Is the testimony from an anonymous witnesses admissible in a court of law?
viewtopic.php?p=1040994#p1040994

Does a witness have to prove he witnessed an event?
viewtopic.php?p=1041058#p1041058

To read more please go to other posts related to...

THE BIBLE , COMPILATION and ... AUTHORSHIP & TRANSMISSION

[1213]

I know for a fact that belief in an afterlife is at odds with reality. But you should not be impressed with my knowledge because the fact that death is the end is as obvious as can be. Just dig up a human body from its grave, and you will see that I'm right.
..

Bible speaks of body, spirit and soul. In it point of view, death of a body doesn’t mean death of soul/spirit. How do you know soul/spirit doesn’t live, even if body has died?

[Tcg]

HEARSAY: A written or oral statement made otherwise than by a witness giving their own first-hand evidence in proceedings, which is tendered as evidence of the matters stated and which is relied on in court to prove the truth of the matters stated.

JOHN 21:24

This is the disciple who gives this witness about these things and who wrote these things ...

Yes...

Yes what. "Yes" is an affirmative what are you agreeing to? That the gospel of John is not HEARSAY. Please explain why you said the word "yes" in response To my point regarding HEARSAY.

It's rather straightforward in it's context which includes this phrase: "Yes, but who was this disciple?" It means, yes that's what it says, but we don't know who this disciple was. Supposed eyewitness testimony from an unknown isn't exactly solid evidence.


Tcg

[JehovahsWitness]

....yes that's what it says....

And if what " it " [the testimony] were true, would it be HEARSAY ? I ask because you included the definition of HEARSAY in your response so I presume it was relevant to your point.

[Paul of Tarsus]

I know for a fact that belief in an afterlife is at odds with reality. But you should not be impressed with my knowledge because the fact that death is the end is as obvious as can be. Just dig up a human body from its grave, and you will see that I'm right.
..

Bible speaks of body, spirit and soul. In it point of view, death of a body doesn’t mean death of soul/spirit. How do you know soul/spirit doesn’t live, even if body has died?

If all you can do to establish the existence of a soul or spirit (what's the difference between them?) is to cite the Bible, then there's really nothing for me to disprove. We know people, like all other living things, die and stay dead. We have solid, empirical evidence for the permanence of death. By contrast, we have no verifiable evidence at all for any spirits. Considering these facts, I am completely justified in concluding that death is permanent.

And I just love it!!!

[Paul of Tarsus]

An assertion made without evidence can be rebutted without evidence.

It is a rejection of your assertion, of the evidence that you think proves your assertion.

So what evidence for the permanence of death did I assert that you deny? If evidence is available for my position, and in this case very abundant evidence supports the permanence of death, then I'm not merely making an assertion. I also have evidence. You appear to be ignoring it.

How long do we need to go until we realize that the promise of a raising of the dead is an empty promise?

For some of us, we know it is a true promise even if still future, because of Christ.

I've yet to see you demonstrate a truth "because of Christ." I don't even know what that means.

For others, it will only be accepted if/when they see it. Not judging either way, just saying.

By all means judge me as a man who believes claims based on observable evidence and testing that supports the claims. I am guilty as charged!

I ignored your chicken analogy because it doesn't change anything. If chickens get a resurrection, then that is also yet to happen; if they don't, then it won't happen at all.

I see. So you won't deny the possibility of a chicken resurrection because it hasn't happened yet.

The carrot Christ dangled was his offer of eternal life. I'd bet good money that without that promise, nobody would pay much attention to Christ.

You'd lose that bet.

How do you know? People abandoning faith in Christ realizing there's no eternal life hasn't happened yet. By your own logic, you cannot know I would lose my bet.

Anyway, Christ does offer eternal life, or so we are told. I've had people tell me that they must put their faith in him lest they have no hope for immortality. I don't see much he has to offer otherwise. And all other supposed saviors who like Christ demand belief almost always offer some kind of life after death. People want the goodies! They're not giving their faith away.

Yeah, none of that makes any sense. If there is no resurrection, no one will be shedding any crocodile tears, because no one will ever know there is no resurrection. So if this is something you want, I'm afraid you are never going to get it.

Maybe you're right, but I like thinking about it.

...here you are preferring that all mankind receives NO resurrection, just because you want some people to proven wrong, and remain dead. That doesn't sound much different than what your 'cruel and judgmental' people want, whoever they are.

I already explained that anything that people want that comes at the cost of hurting others is something I hope they never get. I hope Christians never receive their salvation for the same reason I hope a man who wants to rape a woman never succeeds in doing so.

Nor are Christ's followers looking forward to seeing people be destroyed.

I'm afraid many of Christ's followers yearn for the bloody vengeance they think he has to offer. From Revelation 6 we read:

9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given; 10 they cried out with a loud voice, “Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?”

When I read stuff like this, I have no problem understanding how belief in Christ has inspired so much violence.

Some who claim to be, perhaps, but being something and claiming to be something are not necessarily the same thing.

I will take your advice here and use it to scrutinize you.

Your claim was falsifiable, and I falsified it.

No, you missed the point. IF you see Christ, then you see God. IF you know Christ, then you know His Father as well. If you don't see or know Christ, then you don't see or know His Father.

OK, by stressing the conditions see Christ and know Christ, you have clarified that your claim is not falsifiable. For those who don't see God or know God, you can just say they cannot do so without seeing Christ or knowing Christ. There's no way to prove that claim wrong, and your claim is safe behind that impossibility.

Since you claim not to see or know Christ, you also do not see or know His Father.

Oh but I have seen and have known Christ, but I failed to see or know God. Can you falsify my claim here? Of course you cannot falsify it, so my claim is as good as yours both claims being unfalsifiable. So Tam, making unfalsifiable claims doesn't get you far especially when they can be countered with other unfalsifiable claims.

[Paul of Tarsus]

There are no eyewitness accounts of Jesus dead or alive, for that matter.

Did I not just referr to one? I know for a fact that there are eyewitness accounts since I just referred to one.

Prove that anybody who wrote of Jesus was an eyewitness.

[tam]

Peace to you,

An assertion made without evidence can be rebutted without evidence.

It is a rejection of your assertion, of the evidence that you think proves your assertion.

So what evidence for the permanence of death did I assert that you deny? If evidence is available for my position, and in this case very abundant evidence supports the permanence of death, then I'm not merely making an assertion. I also have evidence. You appear to be ignoring it.

Sorry, I was unclear.

I do not reject the fact that there are dead remains in graves, tombs, etc. I reject the idea that this somehow proves there is no resurrection to come.

The carrot Christ dangled was his offer of eternal life. I'd bet good money that without that promise, nobody would pay much attention to Christ.

You'd lose that bet.

How do you know?

Because I know me. I started following Christ - not for a reward - but out of love for Him. I am sure I am not the only person this applies to.

People abandoning faith in Christ realizing there's no eternal life hasn't happened yet.

I am sure it has happened in those who believe there is no eternal life. But you didn't say 'some would not pay attention to Christ', you said NOBODY would pay attention to Christ.

By your own logic, you cannot know I would lose my bet.

See above.

Anyway, Christ does offer eternal life, or so we are told. I've had people tell me that they must put their faith in him lest they have no hope for immortality. I don't see much he has to offer otherwise.

Love, truth, fruits of the spirit, joy, guidance, aid, forgiveness, the ability to know also the Father, peace. And yes, Christ offers eternal life as well.

But do you only love other people for what they can give you, or do you sometimes love other people because of who they are? If you can answer that question with a 'no' and then a 'yes', then it should not be so hard to grasp that some would also love Christ (and His Father) for who they are, even while being grateful for any gift that they give.

Yeah, none of that makes any sense. If there is no resurrection, no one will be shedding any crocodile tears, because no one will ever know there is no resurrection. So if this is something you want, I'm afraid you are never going to get it.

Maybe you're right, but I like thinking about it.

...here you are preferring that all mankind receives NO resurrection, just because you want some people to proven wrong, and remain dead. That doesn't sound much different than what your 'cruel and judgmental' people want, whoever they are.

I already explained that anything that people want that comes at the cost of hurting others is something I hope they never get.

But isn't that also something that you want?

I hope Christians never receive their salvation for the same reason I hope a man who wants to rape a woman never succeeds in doing so.

This is a warped view of salvation. What about those Christans who rejoice for anyone being able to receive eternal life (Christian or non-Christian)?

Nor are Christ's followers looking forward to seeing people be destroyed.

I'm afraid many of Christ's followers yearn for the bloody vengeance they think he has to offer. From Revelation 6 we read:

9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given; 10 they cried out with a loud voice, “Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?”

When I read stuff like this, I have no problem understanding how belief in Christ has inspired so much violence.

You understand that they were the ones who were slaughtered, right?
You also understand that the the response they get is to WAIT, right?

Nor is it mentioned here what manner that judgment or that vengeance might take.

Some who claim to be, perhaps, but being something and claiming to be something are not necessarily the same thing.

I will take your advice here and use it to scrutinize you.

Do as you choose, it doesn't make what I said any less true.

Since you claim not to see or know Christ, you also do not see or know His Father.

Oh but I have seen and have known Christ, but I failed to see or know God. Can you falsify my claim here?

I don't have to. You have done that yourself.

I tried it--I saw no Christ and saw no God and know nothing for sure about either one of them. - "Paul of Tarsus"



Peace again to you.