Who met Paul on Damascus Road?

[tutle64]

Let's preface this debate with a bit of background. Paul was first introduced in the biblical drama as Saul in Acts 7:58. He not only dragged these members of The Way off to prison, but voted to have them killed (Acts 26:10). Paul then apparently converted and became an apostle. The most notable point that legitimized him was the Damascus Road conversion in Acts 9, 22, and 26. In this event, Paul was in the middle of persecuting The Way when suddenly he was met by a bright light. This light called itself Jesus, told Paul to do some things, then told him to get up. In two of the three stories, Paul is blinded. Some contradictions include who the light shined around, what Paul was blinded by, whether the men with him heard a voice, whether they saw a light, and whether they fell to the ground with Paul. My question for you is, who met Paul on Damascus Road? I am convinced that he could not have met Jesus because Acts 1:11, Rev 1:7, and Mat 24:30 all lead to the conclusion that Jesus would not come back until judgment day, coming on the clouds. I believe that Paul met Satan, disguised as an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14), on Damascus Road. So again, who met Paul on Damascus Road?

[POI]

I actually think it is fully possible miracles, or supernatural events can happen outside of Christianity... And the Bible would actually support this. It says there are true prophets and false prophets, that Satan goes around and deceives people, etc...

So what?

Okay, things are getting more interesting now.... You now have presented (2) points of rationale:

1) Multiple witnesses = true....
2) The Bible says....

Based upon your rationale, you would have to believe the Sathya Sai Baba miracles did happen because:

1) Many people reported/witnessed it
2) The Bible says stuff about false prophets and Satan's deception

***************************

So what? Well, sounds as though you have a pretty low level for skepticism, in virtually any claim really. Why? Sounds like as long as there are a very small handful of witnesses, it's true, regardless of the claim. --- Due to 1) witnesses and 2) Satan's continuous deceptive devices. This must mean you also believe in virtually all claimed UFO abductions, haunted houses, Big Foot, etc etc etc?

[brunumb]

Also you guys should totally have faith... just give it up.... you got no answers... God is good, and Jesus loves you...

Faith is not a virtue. It is what leads one to believe anything regardless of whether it is true or false. In that regard it is quite useless when it comes to issues of any significance. It is often given as an excuse for religious beliefs when there is nothing else to prop up those beliefs and there is a fear associated with giving them up.

[Diogenes]

We are talking about Paul suffering delirium, which is one of the most prominent theories about how Christianity/Resurrection came into existence from atheistic critics. So yes the rationale that others witnessed the same things, including 2 other people on the road to Damascus, ....

One of the thing that bothers me about some debaters who advance Christian orthodoxy is that they don't even read their own scriptures carefully. This does not enhance their credibility.
The people traveling with Paul did not witness the same things as Paul, as I have pointed out previously on this thread:

Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him.  And falling to the ground, he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.  But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.
Acts 9:3-7

The 'witnesses' with Paul are anonymous. Supposedly they had names, if they were there at all, but giving them names would have allowed others to interview them and check their stories. Anonymous witnesses have zero credibility. Neither Paul nor Luke name these 'witnesses.' If there really were witnesses who even heard some of what Paul claimed, would they have converted to Christianity too? If so Luke would have told us, and named them. They did not convert and remain anonymous because they did not experience Paul's hallucination.
AND even this biased, long after the fact, revisionist version, has the men NOT seeing what Paul claimed to see. They heard a voice, supposedly. Whose voice? Paul never met Jesus. He never saw Jesus. How would he know what Jesus looked like or sounded like? This typical of illusions, visions, hallucinations, dreams. The unconscious mind fills in details.

As for your

Dude i dont know who Sathya Sai Baba is.

Of course you don't. Look it up. While you're at it, you might consider reading the Bible more carefully.

[Shem Yoshi]

I actually think it is fully possible miracles, or supernatural events can happen outside of Christianity... And the Bible would actually support this. It says there are true prophets and false prophets, that Satan goes around and deceives people, etc...

So what?

Okay, things are getting more interesting now.... You now have presented (2) points of rationale:

1) Multiple witnesses = true....
2) The Bible says....

#1 is in error... Because there is multiple witnesses means that someone hallucinating it isn't a valid answer.

Based upon your rationale, you would have to believe the Sathya Sai Baba miracles did happen because:

1) Many people reported/witnessed it
2) The Bible says stuff about false prophets and Satan's deception

Note the error mentioned above. I do not believe just because multiple witnesses say something that it means it is true.

So what? Well, sounds as though you have a pretty low level for skepticism, in virtually any claim really. Why? Sounds like as long as there are a very small handful of witnesses, it's true, regardless of the claim. --- Due to 1) witnesses and 2) Satan's continuous deceptive devices. This must mean you also believe in virtually all claimed UFO abductions, haunted houses, Big Foot, etc etc etc?

again note the error....

[Shem Yoshi]

We are talking about Paul suffering delirium, which is one of the most prominent theories about how Christianity/Resurrection came into existence from atheistic critics. So yes the rationale that others witnessed the same things, including 2 other people on the road to Damascus, ....

One of the thing that bothers me about some debaters who advance Christian orthodoxy is that they don't even read their own scriptures carefully. This does not enhance their credibility.
The people traveling with Paul did not witness the same things as Paul, as I have pointed out previously on this thread:

Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him.  And falling to the ground, he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.  But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.
Acts 9:3-7

The 'witnesses' with Paul are anonymous. Supposedly they had names, if they were there at all, but giving them names would have allowed others to interview them and check their stories. Anonymous witnesses have zero credibility. Neither Paul nor Luke name these 'witnesses.' If there really were witnesses who even heard some of what Paul claimed, would they have converted to Christianity too? If so Luke would have told us, and named them. They did not convert and remain anonymous because they did not experience Paul's hallucination.
AND even this biased, long after the fact, revisionist version, has the men NOT seeing what Paul claimed to see. They heard a voice, supposedly. Whose voice? Paul never met Jesus. He never saw Jesus. How would he know what Jesus looked like or sounded like? This typical of illusions, visions, hallucinations, dreams. The unconscious mind fills in details.

As for your

Dude i dont know who Sathya Sai Baba is.

Of course you don't. Look it up. While you're at it, you might consider reading the Bible more carefully.

Diogenes, when i say witness, I was talking about the other people hearing the voice as you mentioned above. (i have read the Bible plenty of times)... It is a fact that if we are to believe Act 9:1-19 of the Road to Damascus story we are confronted with other people witnessing (through sound) the same thing Paul heard. If we are to believe this is a hallucination, we would have to explain this away somehow (including Aeneas's likewise miraculous encounter of Jesus that is also essential in Paul's conversions story... who IS named).

Now you can suggest that they lied... But that certainly doesnt give any credibility to Paul hallucinating... You are left with a sort of picking and choosing what you want to believe as actually happening and what you dont believe..

If you are going to actually believe that Paul saw a light and heard Jesus voice.. Why not Aeneas in just a few verse later, that was essential in Paul's conversion?

[POI]

#1 is in error... Because there is multiple witnesses means that someone hallucinating it isn't a valid answer.

Not sure why you keep going backwards.... I'm not claiming Paul hallucinated. I already conceded there would be no way to prove whether he did, or didn't, being it is unfalsifiable.

You are convinced the Jesus story line is true because we have more than one witness, as you also alluded to as early as post #29 --> "The Gospels themselves are full of historical people and references who witnessed Jesus".

Note the error mentioned above. I do not believe just because multiple witnesses say something that it means it is true.

Hmm.... Could have fooled me. Reads as though the reason you trust the Jesus story line, is because of what you said above. I guess this means you must believe in UFO's, Big Foot, Sathya Sai Baba, etc, because they have countless testimonials, and, that these are all the works of the devil?

[Shem Yoshi]

#1 is in error... Because there is multiple witnesses means that someone hallucinating it isn't a valid answer.

Not sure why you keep going backwards.... I'm not claiming Paul hallucinated. I already conceded there would be no way to prove whether he did, or didn't, being it is unfalsifiable.

You are convinced the Jesus story line is true because we have more than one witness, as you also alluded to as early as post #29 --> "The Gospels themselves are full of historical people and references who witnessed Jesus".

Note the error mentioned above. I do not believe just because multiple witnesses say something that it means it is true.

Hmm.... Could have fooled me. Reads as though the reason you trust the Jesus story line, is because of what you said above. I guess this means you must believe in UFO's, Big Foot, Sathya Sai Baba, etc, because they have countless testimonials, and, that these are all the works of the devil?

Ok maybe we are getting somewhere... I dont think I will ever be able to convey to you the entire reason I believe in Jesus Christ, but it is everything... I would seriously recommend you reading three books, Matt (or any Gospel), Acts, and Romans. That is a good foundation of Christian beliefs. Ultimately I suppose I believe in Jesus because the truth spoke to me.

Hebrews 4 "For the word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart."

I believe I have seen Gods work in the world, including the foundation of nations like being prophesied in Daniel 9, the profound inspiration of wisdom like in Proverbs, the explanation of order and origins like in Genesis, the history of our struggles with ruling class like exodus. The inspiration of the foundations of laws and justice like the Torah. The prophetic utterances that speak to the soul like the prophets, who also spoke of the Messiah. The likeness of Jesus to humanity in his struggles with the Pharisees, and with Satan, and the good things he did. Seeing the spirit of Christ unveiled in our world and our struggles, and likewise the apostles. The epistles especially speak to the soul, the essence of sin and faith and salvation. The inner convictions my soul has for such things. The Disciples convictions speak to me as a person, and their testimony and witnessing of the Messiah, the Savior who fulfilled Gods purpose, unto their deaths.

Surely truth itself has to penetrate much deeper, especially a truth as personal as Christianity, then just its outer shell. I suppose ultimately it is by faith, and i truly believe you should let that weigh on you, because truly it is by faith. But that doesnt negate the sheer magnitude of the conviction of the evidences of Christianity. It isnt because of multiple witnesses, it is because of the witnesses magnitude of convictions the cut down to the inner soul, is why I truly believe.

But surely personal experience has to be personal. That is why I would erdge you to read Matt, Acts and Romans, with an open mind.

I do not believe any good explanation has been given that can raise reasonable doubt into the authenticity of Christianity

[POI]

Ok maybe we are getting somewhere...

Hopefully.

I dont think I will ever be able to convey to you the entire reason I believe in Jesus Christ,

So <1) eyewitnesses and 2) the Bible says so>, are not the only two reasons?

I would seriously recommend you reading three books, Matt (or any Gospel), Acts, and Romans. That is a good foundation of Christian beliefs. Ultimately I suppose I believe in Jesus because the truth spoke to me.

FYI. I was a Christian for >30 years, and read the Bible.

I believe I have seen Gods work in the world, including the foundation of nations like being prophesied in Daniel 9, the profound inspiration of wisdom like in Proverbs, the explanation of order and origins like in Genesis, the history of our struggles with ruling class like exodus. The inspiration of the foundations of laws and justice like the Torah. The prophetic utterances that speak to the soul like the prophets, who also spoke of the Messiah. The likeness of Jesus to humanity in his struggles with the Pharisees, and with Satan, and the good things he did. Seeing the spirit of Christ unveiled in our world and our struggles, and likewise the apostles. The epistles especially speak to the soul, the essence of sin and faith and salvation. The inner convictions my soul has for such things. The Disciples convictions speak to me as a person, and their testimony and witnessing of the Messiah, the Savior who fulfilled Gods purpose, unto their deaths.

So the complete list for belief in the Jesus story, (including Paul's tale)?:

1) other eyewitnesses
2) the Bible says so
3) answered prophecy

Surely truth itself has to penetrate much deeper, especially a truth as personal as Christianity, then just its outer shell. I suppose ultimately it is by faith, and i truly believe you should let that weigh on you, because truly it is by faith. But that doesnt negate the sheer magnitude of the conviction of the evidences of Christianity. It isnt because of multiple witnesses, it is because of the witnesses magnitude of convictions the cut down to the inner soul, is why I truly believe.

So it's actually?:

1) other eyewitnesses
2) the Bible says so
3) answered prophecy
4) faith
5) personal experiences

I do not believe any good explanation has been given that can raise reasonable doubt into the authenticity of Christianity

Kool. I bet there might be..... But when you see them, you might look the other way.

Getting back on track, here is why I brought up what I brought up before....

The OP was likely generated because Christianity is quite present, and surrounds many of us. The claim is HUGE and many regions embrace this belief. It's not a fringe belief system, like Scientology or something.

Paul had a Jesus experience, and another person(s) 'verified' it. Okay, on what basis should I believe this story? So far, your explanation is no better than the ones given about Sathya Sai Baba. A matter of fact, we have more evidence for Sathya Sai Baba, than we do for Jesus.

So I ask you, point/blank, why do I doubt both the Jesus story, as well as the Sathya Sai Baba story? The answer is, I really do not know for sure. Other than they sound very far fetched..... So yea, us doubters can speculate, until the cows come home, as to why we doubt the claim. But because we CANNOT come up with an iron clad explanation as to why it DIDN'T happen, does not give theists cart blanche to then assert that it did happen Why? Because it is unfalsifiable. Thus far, you have stated we have other witnesses, besides Paul. Okay? But you already conceded that witnesses alone may not sway you towards believing a clam. So?

I guess the take away question then becomes, is it reasonable (for me) to remain doubtful of the claim, (that Paul actually HAD a Jesus experience)? If no, why not? Why not just remain agnostic, or doubtful, like I do about Sathya Sai Baba's claims?

[Shem Yoshi]

Ok maybe we are getting somewhere...

Hopefully.

I dont think I will ever be able to convey to you the entire reason I believe in Jesus Christ,

So <1) eyewitnesses and 2) the Bible says so>, are not the only two reasons?

I would seriously recommend you reading three books, Matt (or any Gospel), Acts, and Romans. That is a good foundation of Christian beliefs. Ultimately I suppose I believe in Jesus because the truth spoke to me.

FYI. I was a Christian for >30 years, and read the Bible.

I believe I have seen Gods work in the world, including the foundation of nations like being prophesied in Daniel 9, the profound inspiration of wisdom like in Proverbs, the explanation of order and origins like in Genesis, the history of our struggles with ruling class like exodus. The inspiration of the foundations of laws and justice like the Torah. The prophetic utterances that speak to the soul like the prophets, who also spoke of the Messiah. The likeness of Jesus to humanity in his struggles with the Pharisees, and with Satan, and the good things he did. Seeing the spirit of Christ unveiled in our world and our struggles, and likewise the apostles. The epistles especially speak to the soul, the essence of sin and faith and salvation. The inner convictions my soul has for such things. The Disciples convictions speak to me as a person, and their testimony and witnessing of the Messiah, the Savior who fulfilled Gods purpose, unto their deaths.

So the complete list for belief in the Jesus story, (including Paul's tale)?:

1) other eyewitnesses
2) the Bible says so
3) answered prophecy

Surely truth itself has to penetrate much deeper, especially a truth as personal as Christianity, then just its outer shell. I suppose ultimately it is by faith, and i truly believe you should let that weigh on you, because truly it is by faith. But that doesnt negate the sheer magnitude of the conviction of the evidences of Christianity. It isnt because of multiple witnesses, it is because of the witnesses magnitude of convictions the cut down to the inner soul, is why I truly believe.

So it's actually?:

1) other eyewitnesses
2) the Bible says so
3) answered prophecy
4) faith
5) personal experiences

I do not believe any good explanation has been given that can raise reasonable doubt into the authenticity of Christianity

Kool. I bet there might be..... But when you see them, you might look the other way.

Getting back on track, here is why I brought up what I brought up before....

The OP was likely generated because Christianity is quite present, and surrounds many of us. The claim is HUGE and many regions embrace this belief. It's not a fringe belief system, like Scientology or something.

Paul had a Jesus experience, and another person(s) 'verified' it. Okay, on what basis should I believe this story? So far, your explanation is no better than the ones given about Sathya Sai Baba. A matter of fact, we have more evidence for Sathya Sai Baba, than we do for Jesus.

So I ask you, point/blank, why do I doubt both the Jesus story, as well as the Sathya Sai Baba story? The answer is, I really do not know for sure. Other than they sound very far fetched..... So yea, us doubters can speculate, until the cows come home, as to why we doubt the claim. But because we CANNOT come up with an iron clad explanation as to why it DIDN'T happen, does not give theists cart blanche to then assert that it did happen Why? Because it is unfalsifiable. Thus far, you have stated we have other witnesses, besides Paul. Okay? But you already conceded that witnesses alone may not sway you towards believing a clam. So?

I guess the take away question then becomes, is it reasonable (for me) to remain doubtful of the claim, (that Paul actually HAD a Jesus experience)? If no, why not? Why not just remain agnostic, or doubtful, like I do about Sathya Sai Baba's claims?

Personally I believe it probably is not reasonable for you to remain doubtful. This would include the external and internal evidences that weight on a person.

I agree with Simon Greenleaf,

"Of the Divine character of the Bible, I think, no man who deals honestly with his own mind and heart can entertain a reasonable doubt, For myself, I must say, that having for many years made the evidences of Christianity the subject of close study, the result has been a firm and increasing conviction of the authenticity and plenary inspiration of the Bible. It is indeed the Word of God."

And that could be true for the supernatural in general. I personally think that denial of unexplained phenomenon is rooted in biases. It is perfectly natural to experience and believe in the unexplained, or things outside scientific materialism.

[neverknewyou]

Personally I believe it probably is not reasonable for you to remain doubtful. This would include the external and internal evidences that weight on a person.

I agree with Simon Greenleaf,

"Of the Divine character of the Bible, I think, no man who deals honestly with his own mind and heart can entertain a reasonable doubt, For myself, I must say, that having for many years made the evidences of Christianity the subject of close study, the result has been a firm and increasing conviction of the authenticity and plenary inspiration of the Bible. It is indeed the Word of God."

And that could be true for the supernatural in general. I personally think that denial of unexplained phenomenon is rooted in biases. It is perfectly natural to experience and believe in the unexplained, or things outside scientific materialism.

In that case anything goes, nothing can prove you wrong and nothing can prove you right.