NationStates Jolt Archive

I enjoy getting into religious conversations, debating various truths, exploring faith and morality logically But there's one argument that I have had several christians, of various denominations, use to try to strengthen their case for the bible being the truth, or at least the new testament's record of the teachings of jesus of Nazareth. It goes like this.


After the resurection, the deciple Thomas doubted that Jesus has arisen, even though his teacher had told him it was going to happen. Jesus later confronts Thomas with the holes still in his body, proving to the doubter that he was really Jesus, and really alive.

Now, having a dissenter among the Deciples, the core and heart of the early church, only weakens the faith's credibility.

And so, it MUST be true, because if someone was making it up, they would never have added that in.

And so the four gospels must be true.


Is there anyone here that can explain this to me? Because, quite frankly, it makes no sence to me to claim that something validates a book, because it has something unexpected in it that would invalidate the book. To me, it appears that the inclusion of the doubting Thomas has strengthened the gospels credibility (as proved by believers trying to use it as an argument for the gospel's validity), and thus if someone was writing a fictional gospel, it would be a great thing FOR them to include.

Is there a fault in my logic? Does this argument, that the doubting Thomas strengthens the gospel's validity, make sence to anyone here?

As I stated in another thread on a similar topic, people believe what they choose to believe, regardless of any "proof." Trying to "prove" a faith is almost a contradiction in terms.

Agreed.

Also, what is written above could be considered circular reasoning.
How do we know god exists, the bible tells us so. How do we know the bible is true, God wrote it.

personally, i like the idea that the writer of the gospel of john was directly appealing to followers of the book of sayings attributed to thomas. after all, only the gospel of john gives thomas an actual role. and it also refers to him as "the twin" - which is the same name given to him in the gospel of thomas, but isn't used in the other gospels.

Agreed.

Also, what is written above could be considered circular reasoning.
How do we know god exists, the bible tells us so. How do we know the bible is true, God wrote it.

Yep. I once went through that with a lady who came to my door "proseltizing." She asked me if I knew about Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. I said "Yes, I have read the Bible cover-to-cover several times, and the Genesis story is largely an allegory and not intended to be taken literally." She said "No, the Bible is true." So I asked, "How do you know?" To which she replied, "Because the Bible says so." I proceded to explain how using a source to prove itself isn't logical, but before I could finish, she got upset at me and said "Well, if you don't even believe the Bible ..!" and left! :)

I recently moved to Utah (for a couple reasons, none of them religiously based) and I discovered something interesting. Noone tries to convert eaqch other in this state, because it's just assumed, for the most part, that you're already a faithful Mormon. I think I found the one place in the country that is actually completely safe against evangelicals of all faiths.