What do you believe and why do you believe it?

[Spectrox]

Ha Ha Ha!

Dude! You are NOT doing ok! As for the "only atheist on this thread" You DO realize this IS a Christian site? You came here of your own accord.

Drop me in the middle of an atheist website, and then after trying to deal with TRUE hatred, insults, and probable expulsion, I would do 100 times better than you are here! Or at least THINK I was. But likely wouldn't make any headway.

And yet you have received virtually NO animosity, NO hatred, only sincere desires for you to be saved.

Some people have been generous and I have acknowledged that. Some people have been hostile and I have responded. Many more have come up with very poor arguments or evidence.

The Bible: The Garden of Eden was paradise. No pain. Adam and Eve disobeyed God and he puts a curse on the Earth. It is now a hellish place and animals are now savage. This is the whole reason for Jesus' mission – to make things right with God.
Evolution: T.Rexs were killing and devouring other animals millions of years before man came on the scene. A cheetah didn't suddenly start ripping a gazelle to pieces when Adam bit the apple.

So death and pain was all part of the "design" from the start. There was no Fall. Therefore no need for anyone to save me from that Fall.



​

 

[Spectrox]

That's to be expected. No one can be convinced of the existence of God if he is wilfully blind. However, the person who wants to see the hand of God simply has to look at Nature closely and carefully, and all that exists around us. And that is why the Bible says that no one has a excuse of not believing in God.

Exactly. Most of the arguments being presented in favour of your God belief are really, really poor.

 

[Chester]

So I came up with the following as a starting point.

1. I as a thinking entity exist.
2. The Laws of Logic are self-attesting truths due to the impossibility of the contrary.

That's my foundation to build on. Yours in highly complex and contrived.

My starting point is Gen 1:1 - "In the beginning God"

You call my starting point "highly complex" and "contrived".
highly complex? Yes, you are right on that count - my God is highly complex - but that is only one side of the story
contrived? That means "deliberately created rather than arising naturally or spontaneously" Well my God was not created nor did I create Him, but He definitely did not arise "naturally" - so I disagree on your use of that word

It is of interest to me that you say "I came up with . . ." -- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????

 

[Spectrox]

"Rapid period of evolution"....what?

Let me help you; ......what is significant about the report is that all of a sudden evidence of ....state of existence..... became apparent...not over a long period of time as evolution would exhibit...by progressive changes.

This renders the concept of evolution to the dung heap.

"Christian God did it ?". What other alternative are you now introducing to the discussion?

"...."that a deity exists"? This is a spin. If no progress with one thought spin the discussion into another direction. Doesn't work that way. Stay on topic.

It lasted for about 13–25 million years. Is that just a flash in the pan? I have trouble conceiving of a thousand years let alone millions. So do you accept the fossil evidence that scientists have put together and the dating?

 

[Spectrox]

My starting point is Gen 1:1 - "In the beginning God"

You call my starting point "highly complex" and "contrived".
highly complex? Yes, you are right on that count - my God is highly complex - but that is only one side of the story
contrived? That means "deliberately created rather than arising naturally or spontaneously" Well my God was not created nor did I create Him, but He definitely did not arise "naturally" - so I disagree on your use of that word

It is of interest to me that you say "I came up with . . ." -- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????

Well you didn't. And I don't think God did either....

 

[Spectrox]

Define "well being"

That will be your subjective definition

There is no way around that, but if you can demonstrate it..... I am listening.

Already answered repeatedly.

 

[Spectrox]

I like this contradiction, thanks for bringing it out.
Matthew and luke are relying on memories of people about incidents years before.
To them eight days or six days are the same thing. No one was counting the time as it went by.
Knowing it was about a week, not a month or a day, the time is pitched.
The real story is Jesus went with 3 disciples and was changed. That is what was stunning to them, the
exact time almost irrelevant. Now this part of the story is the Kingdom of God coming to earth.
Moses and Elijah appear and talk with Jesus. God the Father speaks and says

"This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him" matt 17:5

Now that is a wow moment. They were blown away by it, it was small in time, yet Jesus says this
was a foundational point in history. Many believers do not even recognise how significant this time
was. Praise the Lord for His grace, Amen.

Has God looked after his book? Is he unable to control what the final edit looks like?

 

[Chester]

Well you didn't. And I don't think God did either....

You can't seem to get away from that "think" as the basis for your reality - Again, you may begin there if you want - but it will lead you to disastrous results in the end - I am warning you!

 

[UnderGrace]

Already answered repeatedly.

Post number please?

 

[Chester]

Has God looked after his book? Is he unable to control what the final edit looks like?

My God is not a controller - He loves . . .

 

[Spectrox]

okay … so they weren't going to Capernaum as you stated.

And, again, an apparent contradiction is easily rectified once you read what is written in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Hopefully, you will see there is no inconsistency in the record.

Both Matthew (17:1) and Mark (9:2) state after six days Jesus went up to the mountain with Peter, James and John.

Luke 9:28 states about eight days after Jesus went up to the mountain with Peter, James and John.


So both Matthew and Mark are consistent in claiming it was six days later.

Luke is not as emphatic in his reckoning of time and claimed it was approximately eight days later.


There is no inconsistency or contradiction. There is an approximation of time in Luke … so give or take a couple of days. I could understand your confusion if Luke had indicated some greater period of time … a month or more. But a couple of days? Appears you're straining at a gnat in your effort to use these records as a reason to not trust Scripture.

Some commentaries indicate that Luke includes portions of days that are excluded by Matthew and Mark (i.e. that Luke includes the days in which Jesus stated what He said in Luke 9:23-27 and the day Jesus took Peter, James and John up to the mountain whereas Matthew and Mark counted only the 6 days between).





Post #166

Not really convinced that there's no inconsistency. What's interesting is that Matthew "borrows" a lot from Mark. Matthew and Luke "borrow" a lot from each other (or the hypothetical Q document?). It's almost word for word in places and yet some details like the above example are changed. Don't you find this a peculiar way for God to produce his ultimate message to humankind? And why then in Judea? Why not China where they were already writing? Or better still now, when we can at least verify some of it and more souls can be saved due to the greater population? The God of the Bible comes across as inept and bungling sometimes.

 

[Spectrox]

You're playing mind games with us and fooling yourself with complex logical operations. The truth is simple but you would never accept a simple solution. You go the long way because you're so sober and wise! The more you search the farther you move from God, because His Words are near the heart, and a healthy conscience testifies to their truth. The murderer's blood stains testify - even through the devil Christ is revealed! If God was not God, then who does the devil resist? When I was an atheist I was also far from God as you are, but the influence of the devil on this world couldn't be hidden, it stinks too much to go unnoticed. I am saying this for your sake.

What do you mean by "His words are near the heart"? How do you know God is the good guy and Satan the wicked one? At the end of the day you are necessarily imposing some of your self onto all of this.

 

[Spectrox]

Criterion must be validated
If it has not been validated it is not useful

Even if I produced a source and said it was validated, I doubt very much you would accept it. So in my example above, have I fulfilled prophecy when receiving my medium-rare steak? What criteria would you find convincing?

 

[UnderGrace]

Even if I produced a source and said it was validated, I doubt very much you would accept it. So in my example above, have I fulfilled prophecy when receiving my medium-rare steak? What criteria would you find convincing?

The one that is validated

 

[Spectrox]

My God is not a controller - He loves . . .

"Religion has convinced people that there's an invisible man ... living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn't want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money." George Carlin

 

[Spectrox]

The one that is validated

Validated how and by whom? I thought you Christians did not accept standards from people?

 

[Chester]

"Religion has convinced people that there's an invisible man ... living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn't want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money." George Carlin

Genesis 1:1 - In the beginning God created . . .
John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that He gave . . .

 

[Chester]

"Religion has convinced people that there's an invisible man ... living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn't want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money." George Carlin

Quite a warped view of God . . . First premise is wrong - He is not just an "invisible man" - and it gets just worse from there . . .

All you give by quoting George Carlin's statement is the natural result of human thinking trying to understand God - quite a mess indeed!

 

[Spectrox]

okay … so they weren't going to Capernaum as you stated.

And, again, an apparent contradiction is easily rectified once you read what is written in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Hopefully, you will see there is no inconsistency in the record.

Both Matthew (17:1) and Mark (9:2) state after six days Jesus went up to the mountain with Peter, James and John.

Luke 9:28 states about eight days after Jesus went up to the mountain with Peter, James and John.


So both Matthew and Mark are consistent in claiming it was six days later.

Luke is not as emphatic in his reckoning of time and claimed it was approximately eight days later.


There is no inconsistency or contradiction. There is an approximation of time in Luke … so give or take a couple of days. I could understand your confusion if Luke had indicated some greater period of time … a month or more. But a couple of days? Appears you're straining at a gnat in your effort to use these records as a reason to not trust Scripture.

Some commentaries indicate that Luke includes portions of days that are excluded by Matthew and Mark (i.e. that Luke includes the days in which Jesus stated what He said in Luke 9:23-27 and the day Jesus took Peter, James and John up to the mountain whereas Matthew and Mark counted only the 6 days between).





Post #166

My final inconsistency challenge to you. "The Easter Challenge" Using all the information in the Gospel accounts (and without omitting any information) please produce a narrative that makes sense for the events surrounding the Resurrection. A summary of the information is below:

Mark - 2 Marys and Salome. 1 man in white garments. Stone already moved out of way. No earthquake described. No resurrection ending in original version, just an empty tomb.

Matthew - Mary Magdalene and the other Mary present. 1 angel. Earthquake occurs and stone rolls out of the way.

Luke - 2 Marys, Joanna and other women. 2 men in white garments. Stone already moved out of the way.
No earthquake described.

John - Mary was present who then fetched Simon Peter. 2 angels. Stone already moved out of the way. No earthquake described.

 

[UnderGrace]

Validated how and by whom? I thought you Christians did not accept standards from people?

Then you would be wrong.