Would you still believe if there was no new testament
Posted on: June 13, 2007 - 6:41pm
Offline
Would you still believe if there was no new testament
I was wondering if people would still believe in the God of the bible if the New Testament never existed, now i don't want to tax the theist mind too much, but you really have to be able to conceptuallise the "what if" here. Cop outs include "that would never happen the new testament was destined to be made" and "but the new testament does exist"
- Login to post comments
I don't know why they take it for fact in the first place: all it is is a bunch of buttered-up lies. No fact whatsoever.
VERITAS OMNIA VINCIT
Mmmmmmm butter ... <in my best Homer Simpson voice>
My Artwork
Plenty of Jews still believe without believing the New testament to be valid (though not many take it all that seriously anymore.)
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
People would still believe because most people are weak-willed and weak-minded. It's easier for them to believe someone else's story than figure things out for themselves.
Let's say there's a big flood and it ruins your crops. On one hand you can look up at the sky and consider it random or unknown, or you can pay attention to this old dude from the neighboring village who has rushed in to tell us it's a god named "BillyBob" in the sky who caused it because you all didn't burn a cat at the altar and give him a bushel of rice. If you do this, he promises no more floods.
People are inherently lazy. It's easier for them to believe whatever's most convenient than to try to figure things out, or more importantly accept the fact that they just don't know the answer at that point in time.
The truth is, the doctrine is irrelevent. This is why there are a hundred thousand different incompatible religions on this planet. Nobody's thinking. They're just subscribing to whatever is easiest. Remember, the brain is a muscle too. If you don't have to exercise to get what you want, why bother?
Wow, I guess this question is pretty tough for xtians, I can imagine... The God of the old testament is a pretty bad dude, but saying that you don't believe in that god would be blasphemous.
Science is organized knowledge. Wisdom is organized life. - Immanuel Kant
More than one theist who posts here has pointed straight to the n.t. as "proof" of jesus.
Essentially, imagine someone deep in the Amazon, unreachable my missionaries, and without access to a bible. Can this person reason his way to a belief in jesus, with the virgin birth, death & resurrection?
The Amazon...where the crickets chirp.
There are no theists on operating tables.
i'm dissapointed in the lack of theist responses to this. it's an important question. Someone who truly believes in their God should be able to answer without hesitation
Be disappointed, but not surprised. Anyone who answers would paint himself into a corner, and no longer have access to the repertoire of theistic fallacies.
There are no theists on operating tables.
The question doesn't really make sense. If there was no New Testament then there would be no context in which to discuss the beliefs surrounding Christianity. At best we could speculate that the lack of a New Testament would have left a religious vacuum that would very likely have been filled with something else. And given the capacity of humans to believe in such things, then there would be numerous adherents to this alternate faith.
My Artwork
He didn't ask if you'd still be a Christian, just if you'd still believe in God. The God of the New Testament is still Yahweh of the old Testament.
Edit: I rather like the question actually.
My bad. I misread the question.
My Artwork
Now that you understand, are you going to answer it?
"This is the real world, stupid." - Charlie Brooker
"It is necessary to be bold. Some people can be reasoned into sense, and others must be shocked into it. Say a bold thing that will stagger them, and they will begin to think." - Thomas Paine
I am not a theist in the mode of contemporary evangelical Americans. So I guess I can't answer it.
My Artwork
it's pretty damn simple: would you believe in God if there was no new testament? If the new testament holds no value to you whatsoever and your belief in god comes from something else, then your answer would be no. if your beliefs are dependent on the material inside it then your answer would be yes. I don't care if ur 'in the mode of contemporary evangelical Americans' or not, answer for yourself, not them.
"This is the real world, stupid." - Charlie Brooker
"It is necessary to be bold. Some people can be reasoned into sense, and others must be shocked into it. Say a bold thing that will stagger them, and they will begin to think." - Thomas Paine
Whatever.
Then I go back to my original response. Removing the new testament from history would not remove theistic thought. It would fundamentally alter it, but it would still exist. So you are asking me speculate how theism would evolve over a period of 2000 years minus a significant piece of what made it the way it is today and then decide if I would still believe as I currently do.
I honestly have no idea.
My Artwork
If...
If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.
If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.
If there wasn't a New Testament, perhaps I'd be a Jew, but then again perhaps not. Judaism is not renowned for attracting converts from outside the "nation" of Israel. Nor is it, from what I understand, very welcoming of those who do choose to convert. Certainly Judaism is not renowned for its great evangelization.
Would I still believe in a God? Probably, since I believe that man is, by nature a religious creature, and has need to believe in something greater than himself.
It's only with the advent of Jesus Christ that God reveals himself to all men and makes known His Covenant to the all nations. Judaism tends towards exclusivity.
That's about the best answer I can come up with. The question is kinda like asking "What if Napoleon had a B-52 at Waterloo?", though.
"With its enduring appeal to the search for truth, philosophy has the great responsibility of forming thought and culture; and now it must strive resolutely to recover its original vocation." Pope John Paul II
That sounds like crypto-Jew talk to me!
Napoleon always struck me as more of a wine aficionado, but I guess a B-52 might've been in order given the situation.
Details of my timeout are posted here.