What do you believe and why do you believe it?
- Thread starter Spectrox
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Saying blah blah blah is a sure sign you are losing the argument. How about some honesty from you? Go and read Exodus 21 and learn just how badly a slave could be treated. The slave could be beaten so badly that if they died on day 3, the slave owner is off the hook! Your position is morally bankrupt. Pal.
You know, the thing you seem to be losing out of your sight when saying prayer does not work and trying to create a study about it, is that many people tend to have very fixed ways in which they want their prayers answered. Like, many people don't take no for an answer.
Or, how about this answer: "It's not the time yet"?
Or maybe: "I have another idea, and it's for the better"?
Or even: "Let them have what they want, and fall, and be broken, so I can finally fix them".
God always hears and answers prayers. The thing is, sometimes that answer is "No".
Gasp! Why does this thing not work? I put my coin in and pulled the lever!
Or, how about this answer: "It's not the time yet"?
Or maybe: "I have another idea, and it's for the better"?
Or even: "Let them have what they want, and fall, and be broken, so I can finally fix them".
God always hears and answers prayers. The thing is, sometimes that answer is "No".
Gasp! Why does this thing not work? I put my coin in and pulled the lever!
-
1
- Show all
An atheist much like an tree will live and die and in like manner as the tree fall in the woods. In an while it will decay and become elements and then the smallest of isotopes ,then eventually the half life will come. Then it will sift down into the grains of sand into the center of the earth and it will be clean dissolved and have no value in the fire...
It does not matter what atheist believe. No belief regardless of ardently held is of any merit if it is against God. God created all things and all things are His and His alone to do with as it pleases Him.
What is important and what really matters is what God has said. Science will never explain nor disprove what God has done simply by speaking.
God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
What is important and what really matters is what God has said. Science will never explain nor disprove what God has done simply by speaking.
God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Since you have "recently" been shown there is no inconsistency between the six days in Matt and Mark and the about eight days in Luke, do you now agree there is no error in Scripture concerning the record?
Since (according to you) nothing written in Scripture is "necessarily true", what difference does it make?
Again, I will pass on your Matt 16 issue. You are unable to comprehend spiritual matters, no explanation from me will be comprehensible to you. Turn to God with your whole heart. Seek Him ... He will reveal Matt 16 to you. 
Since (according to you) nothing written in Scripture is "necessarily true", what difference does it make?
Spectrox said:
In terms of Matthew 16, I can wait a little longer for an explanation but Im not willing to wait 2000 years for nothing to happen...
Here are the three texts:
Matthew's says:
Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Mat_17:1 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
Mark's says:
Mar 9:1 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.
Mar_9:2 And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
Luke's says:
Luk 9:27 But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.
Luk_9:28 And it came to pass about an eight days after these sayings, he took Peter and John and James, and went up into a mountain to pray.
These are not in contradiction. They are saying the same thing, from two differing angles. Consider:
"after six days" = the 7th day (the word 'after' means that which takes place in a following position, even according to Thayer's Lexicon)
"about an eight days after" = the 7th day (the word 'about, means approaching or 'nearly', even according to Thayer's Lexicon)
The saying:
"six of one, half a dozen of the other" comes to mind.
As to the second point, Jesus is referring to the final day. The events that transpired, are but a type, a faint shadow of the final "Day of the LORD", when the Translated (as represented by Elijah) and the Resurrected (as represented by Moses) will be together with Jesus in glory, as it is written,
1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him (ie back to Heaven to the Father).
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Peter speaks of the mount of transfiguration event in his own epistle:
2Pe 1:11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
2Pe 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
2Pe 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
2Pe 1:18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
2Pe 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Notice how Luke describes the scene:
Luk 9:29 And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering.
Luk 9:30 And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias:
Luk 9:31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.
Luk 9:32 But Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep: and when they were awake, they saw his glory, and the two men that stood with him.
So it refers to the immediate moment (Luke 9:27), as a type to the greater event (Luke 9:26). In other words, a miniature picture of the grand finale. In fact, John who was with them, even later also saw in vision, the final events (Revelation).
Jesus also speaks of 'seeing' (which deals with more than simply the physical eyeball, but the understanding of the heart/mind, see Genesis 3:5-7) the Kingdom of God, by faith, even though Peter, James and John got a snapshot of it by their eyeballs:
Joh_3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
This is repeated throughout John 3.
Matthew's says:
Mat 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Mat_17:1 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
Mark's says:
Mar 9:1 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.
Mar_9:2 And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
Luke's says:
Luk 9:27 But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.
Luk_9:28 And it came to pass about an eight days after these sayings, he took Peter and John and James, and went up into a mountain to pray.
These are not in contradiction. They are saying the same thing, from two differing angles. Consider:
"after six days" = the 7th day (the word 'after' means that which takes place in a following position, even according to Thayer's Lexicon)
"about an eight days after" = the 7th day (the word 'about, means approaching or 'nearly', even according to Thayer's Lexicon)
The saying:
"six of one, half a dozen of the other" comes to mind.
As to the second point, Jesus is referring to the final day. The events that transpired, are but a type, a faint shadow of the final "Day of the LORD", when the Translated (as represented by Elijah) and the Resurrected (as represented by Moses) will be together with Jesus in glory, as it is written,
1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him (ie back to Heaven to the Father).
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Peter speaks of the mount of transfiguration event in his own epistle:
2Pe 1:11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
2Pe 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
2Pe 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
2Pe 1:18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
2Pe 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Notice how Luke describes the scene:
Luk 9:29 And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering.
Luk 9:30 And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias:
Luk 9:31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.
Luk 9:32 But Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep: and when they were awake, they saw his glory, and the two men that stood with him.
So it refers to the immediate moment (Luke 9:27), as a type to the greater event (Luke 9:26). In other words, a miniature picture of the grand finale. In fact, John who was with them, even later also saw in vision, the final events (Revelation).
Jesus also speaks of 'seeing' (which deals with more than simply the physical eyeball, but the understanding of the heart/mind, see Genesis 3:5-7) the Kingdom of God, by faith, even though Peter, James and John got a snapshot of it by their eyeballs:
Joh_3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
This is repeated throughout John 3.
-
1
- Show all
Star Trek, that confused system of Christianity, Kabbalism and Atheism?
Captain James T(iberius) Kirk:
Captain (one who leads, is in charge over others, as a Pastor)
James (first Head of the Council of Jerusalem, Acts 15)
Tiberius (Roman Emperor under which Jesus Christ was crucified)
Kirk (meaning = Church)
Thus, this position, is literally, the Pastor of the First Church which crucifies Jesus Christ afresh.
As for "enterprise", it means a venture, an undertaking, or even a 'mission'.
The devil knows exactly what he is doing, and that just the tip.
Leonard Nimoy also has serious kabbalistic influences therein and had serious issue with photographing nude women in his own home in the presence of his wife.
The various 'god' characters throughout were mostly pagan, yet there is one that stood out, in TheNextGen, being "Q", a sleight on the so called "Q" document hypothesis which is vain imagination of skeptics, and this character even placed men upon trial, as is found in Daniel 7:9-10,22; Revelation 14:6-7, 20:11. It was a mere mockery of Jesus Christ and of God.
What the show did somewhat reflect, is that there are indeed beings on other worlds, as scripture states, but herein too, the story is gnostically flipped, in that the beings in Star Trek are all fallen sinful beings, whereas in scripture, they are unfallen beings on those unfallen worlds (the '99' (symbolic) that needed no repentance and went not astra, as there are many texts on these beings). Heaven is indeed real, not aethereal clouds of nothing. Jesus Christ ascended to a real place where the Father is "in Heaven" (3rd), being beyond the local 'heaven' (of atmosphere where birds fly) and 'heaven' (of local sun, moon and stars (planets)).
I notice how you stated 'modern humanism', for the Bible speaks of Atheism, all the way back with the Pharaoh in the days of Moses, and is also mentioned in Ephesians 2:12 ('without God', 'atheoi'), as elsewhere such as Daniel 11, 'king of the South' (Daniel 11:40) and in Revelation 9:11; 11:8; speaking of atheisticially led France:
The French Revolution grows brutal, turning into the Reign of Terror, abolishing the Bible [the Law and the Testimony, the Two Witnesses; Deuteronomy 31:26; Zechariah 4:6; Matthew 24:14; Acts 10:43; Romans 3:21, etc, referring back to the OT Moses [Law], Deuteronomy 11:17; and OT Elijah [Testimony/Prophets], 1 King 8:35; 2 Chronicles 6:26, 7:13 [see also - 1 Kings 17:1,14,15, 18:1,41,44,45]; Luke 4:25; James 5:17, as types, and the same for the plagues in the OT, Exodus 4:9, 7:19, 9:14] by state law [being the place of judgment, “the street” [Nehemiah 8:1,3; Job 29:7], in which the “truth” [law and prophets] fell, Isaiah 59:14; see also the “light” of Psalms 119:105; Isaiah 8:20; 2 Peter 1:19], in AD 1793 unto AD 1797, which is the 3 ½ day/years [Numbers 14:34; Ezekiel 4:6, etc] of Revelation 11:9,11:
Revelation 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.
Revelation 11:11 And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.
"... The world, for the first time, heard an assembly of men, born and educated in civilization, and assuming the right to govern one of the finest of the European nations, uplift their united voice to deny the most solemn truth which man’s soul receives, and renounce unanimously the belief and worship of a Deity. ..." [Sir Walter Scott, Life of Napoleon, Vol. 1, Ch. 17; Page 239]-https://books.google.com/books?id=Kn...page&q&f=false
“... France is the only nation in the world concerning which the authentic record survives, that as a nation she lifted her hand in open rebellion against the Author of the universe. Plenty of blasphemers, plenty of infidels, there have been, and still continue to be, in England, Germany, Spain, and elsewhere; but France stands apart in the world’s history as the single state which, by the decree of her Legislative Assembly, pronounced that there was no God, and of which the entire population of the capital, and a vast majority elsewhere, women as well as men, danced and sang with joy in accepting the announcement.”—Blackwood’s Magazine, November, 1870 - https://books.google.com/books?id=7V...page&q&f=false
Captain James T(iberius) Kirk:
Captain (one who leads, is in charge over others, as a Pastor)
James (first Head of the Council of Jerusalem, Acts 15)
Tiberius (Roman Emperor under which Jesus Christ was crucified)
Kirk (meaning = Church)
Thus, this position, is literally, the Pastor of the First Church which crucifies Jesus Christ afresh.
As for "enterprise", it means a venture, an undertaking, or even a 'mission'.
The devil knows exactly what he is doing, and that just the tip.
Leonard Nimoy also has serious kabbalistic influences therein and had serious issue with photographing nude women in his own home in the presence of his wife.
The various 'god' characters throughout were mostly pagan, yet there is one that stood out, in TheNextGen, being "Q", a sleight on the so called "Q" document hypothesis which is vain imagination of skeptics, and this character even placed men upon trial, as is found in Daniel 7:9-10,22; Revelation 14:6-7, 20:11. It was a mere mockery of Jesus Christ and of God.
What the show did somewhat reflect, is that there are indeed beings on other worlds, as scripture states, but herein too, the story is gnostically flipped, in that the beings in Star Trek are all fallen sinful beings, whereas in scripture, they are unfallen beings on those unfallen worlds (the '99' (symbolic) that needed no repentance and went not astra, as there are many texts on these beings). Heaven is indeed real, not aethereal clouds of nothing. Jesus Christ ascended to a real place where the Father is "in Heaven" (3rd), being beyond the local 'heaven' (of atmosphere where birds fly) and 'heaven' (of local sun, moon and stars (planets)).
I notice how you stated 'modern humanism', for the Bible speaks of Atheism, all the way back with the Pharaoh in the days of Moses, and is also mentioned in Ephesians 2:12 ('without God', 'atheoi'), as elsewhere such as Daniel 11, 'king of the South' (Daniel 11:40) and in Revelation 9:11; 11:8; speaking of atheisticially led France:
The French Revolution grows brutal, turning into the Reign of Terror, abolishing the Bible [the Law and the Testimony, the Two Witnesses; Deuteronomy 31:26; Zechariah 4:6; Matthew 24:14; Acts 10:43; Romans 3:21, etc, referring back to the OT Moses [Law], Deuteronomy 11:17; and OT Elijah [Testimony/Prophets], 1 King 8:35; 2 Chronicles 6:26, 7:13 [see also - 1 Kings 17:1,14,15, 18:1,41,44,45]; Luke 4:25; James 5:17, as types, and the same for the plagues in the OT, Exodus 4:9, 7:19, 9:14] by state law [being the place of judgment, “the street” [Nehemiah 8:1,3; Job 29:7], in which the “truth” [law and prophets] fell, Isaiah 59:14; see also the “light” of Psalms 119:105; Isaiah 8:20; 2 Peter 1:19], in AD 1793 unto AD 1797, which is the 3 ½ day/years [Numbers 14:34; Ezekiel 4:6, etc] of Revelation 11:9,11:
Revelation 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.
Revelation 11:11 And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.
"... The world, for the first time, heard an assembly of men, born and educated in civilization, and assuming the right to govern one of the finest of the European nations, uplift their united voice to deny the most solemn truth which man’s soul receives, and renounce unanimously the belief and worship of a Deity. ..." [Sir Walter Scott, Life of Napoleon, Vol. 1, Ch. 17; Page 239]-https://books.google.com/books?id=Kn...page&q&f=false
“... France is the only nation in the world concerning which the authentic record survives, that as a nation she lifted her hand in open rebellion against the Author of the universe. Plenty of blasphemers, plenty of infidels, there have been, and still continue to be, in England, Germany, Spain, and elsewhere; but France stands apart in the world’s history as the single state which, by the decree of her Legislative Assembly, pronounced that there was no God, and of which the entire population of the capital, and a vast majority elsewhere, women as well as men, danced and sang with joy in accepting the announcement.”—Blackwood’s Magazine, November, 1870 - https://books.google.com/books?id=7V...page&q&f=false
-
1
- Show all
You seem to not believe in anything...but, I conclude you believe in yourself. That could be a good start if you properly question Spectrox's approach to a proper conclusion on the level of your analysis of G-d's creation and existence.. You seem to believe in evolution or similar but not creation. This suggest you need to begin anew with basics.
May I suggest we review the mythical evolution matter as a first step;
Please analyze the ......Cambrian Explosion ...study which proves evolution is a myth. .....http://www.darwinsdilemma.org/pdf/faq.pdf
there are many other references for the study.
After your analysis and study, let us know your thoughts.
-
1
- Show all
PART ONE
As this thread will be coming to a close shortly, I thought I would just summarise what I have learned whilst being on here and to emphasise certain points. I would like to thank the Admins for allowing this discussion to happen on their site. Some Christian sites do not allow any kind of debate with non-believers which I have always thought to be a cowardly approach.
I have had some meaningful exchanges with Christians (you know who you are) and some frustrating exchanges with others (you also know who you are). The worst ones reminded me of why I left Christianity in the first place. Some contributors on this thread were not doing anything that resembled thinking. In their heads they were simply rearranging their prejudices.
One of the more bizarre Christian posts said I had “traded truth” for non-existence, as if believing they will continue makes it more likely they will survive death, whereas I won’t. I’ve heard the argument before. It’s basically Pascal’s Wager, which is one of the weakest arguments in favour of Christianity ever devised. It comes from ego. In fact I feel that Christianity plays on various primal fears we all have. Fear of death or non-existence. Fear of pain. Fear of not being loved or losing someone we have loved. It offers a false hope of an afterlife which probably isn’t there. That’s the human cost to a believer, sacrificing the only life they know they are going to get to a superstitious belief system. What better way of encouraging belief in an afterlife than create a heaven and a hell as the carrot and stick, which is all about control, not love. Hell or hellish imagery is talked about much more than heaven in the Bible, because life was pretty harsh 2000 years ago so the threat of Hell had to be really really bad. So it was the worst pain ever, for infinite time. This is the ultimate in extremism.
Brutal imagery abound in the OT and NT. At the heart of Christianity is the most appalling human sacrifice imaginable. And Jesus says stuff like “If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away!” That must have been a gift to the evil people who spearheaded the Inquisition. If you are God and millions of people are likely to believe what you say, maybe you should choose your words carefully?
Anything good about modern living has been due to the consistent attempt by humanists to reduce human misery which have usually been opposed at every turn by Christianity, e.g. contraception, medicine, critical thinking, rock music and even humour.
The more our lives are aligned with the way the world works, the more likely we can solve our problems. The Bible is so way off the mark, that the supposed creator of the Universe cannot even get the order of creation correct in the opening chapters of his book. According to this God, the Earth was created first, then plants and then the Sun, which is wrong based on our modern understanding of star and planet formation. But this is dismissed or “explained” away with a post-hoc rationalisation about another source of light capable of powering photosynthesis, which has no scientific evidence whatsoever.
Also the creator of the Universe appears not to be able to be able to predict his Second Coming (Matthew 16). Unless it can be demonstrated otherwise, Jesus’ claim still looks totally false.
Other “arguments”, if they can be called that, were essentially shifting the burden of proof away from the Christian by employing a double negative, i.e. there’s something wrong with the unbeliever. Clever that. Almost.
As this thread will be coming to a close shortly, I thought I would just summarise what I have learned whilst being on here and to emphasise certain points. I would like to thank the Admins for allowing this discussion to happen on their site. Some Christian sites do not allow any kind of debate with non-believers which I have always thought to be a cowardly approach.
I have had some meaningful exchanges with Christians (you know who you are) and some frustrating exchanges with others (you also know who you are). The worst ones reminded me of why I left Christianity in the first place. Some contributors on this thread were not doing anything that resembled thinking. In their heads they were simply rearranging their prejudices.
One of the more bizarre Christian posts said I had “traded truth” for non-existence, as if believing they will continue makes it more likely they will survive death, whereas I won’t. I’ve heard the argument before. It’s basically Pascal’s Wager, which is one of the weakest arguments in favour of Christianity ever devised. It comes from ego. In fact I feel that Christianity plays on various primal fears we all have. Fear of death or non-existence. Fear of pain. Fear of not being loved or losing someone we have loved. It offers a false hope of an afterlife which probably isn’t there. That’s the human cost to a believer, sacrificing the only life they know they are going to get to a superstitious belief system. What better way of encouraging belief in an afterlife than create a heaven and a hell as the carrot and stick, which is all about control, not love. Hell or hellish imagery is talked about much more than heaven in the Bible, because life was pretty harsh 2000 years ago so the threat of Hell had to be really really bad. So it was the worst pain ever, for infinite time. This is the ultimate in extremism.
Brutal imagery abound in the OT and NT. At the heart of Christianity is the most appalling human sacrifice imaginable. And Jesus says stuff like “If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away!” That must have been a gift to the evil people who spearheaded the Inquisition. If you are God and millions of people are likely to believe what you say, maybe you should choose your words carefully?
Anything good about modern living has been due to the consistent attempt by humanists to reduce human misery which have usually been opposed at every turn by Christianity, e.g. contraception, medicine, critical thinking, rock music and even humour.
The more our lives are aligned with the way the world works, the more likely we can solve our problems. The Bible is so way off the mark, that the supposed creator of the Universe cannot even get the order of creation correct in the opening chapters of his book. According to this God, the Earth was created first, then plants and then the Sun, which is wrong based on our modern understanding of star and planet formation. But this is dismissed or “explained” away with a post-hoc rationalisation about another source of light capable of powering photosynthesis, which has no scientific evidence whatsoever.
Also the creator of the Universe appears not to be able to be able to predict his Second Coming (Matthew 16). Unless it can be demonstrated otherwise, Jesus’ claim still looks totally false.
Other “arguments”, if they can be called that, were essentially shifting the burden of proof away from the Christian by employing a double negative, i.e. there’s something wrong with the unbeliever. Clever that. Almost.
PART TWO
The Bible thrives on ambiguity and complexity. It’s not clear whether it’s allegory or to be taken literally. If it’s part allegory and part literal, where does the transition occur? One of the gospels draws a direct line from Adam to Jesus. Personally I think it’s likely to be almost entirely allegory. Even Mark Chapter 4 seems to be suggesting this and this was probably the first gospel written, which Matthew and Luke copied huge chunks from verbatim.
The Easter Challenge I offered could have been harder. I could have asked why reports of supernatural beings, vanishing and materializing out of thin air, long-dead corpses coming back to life, and people levitating should be given serious consideration at all. Thomas Paine was one of the first to point out that outrageous claims require outrageous proof.
Protestants and Catholics seem to have no trouble applying healthy skepticism to the miracles of Islam, or to the "historical" visit between Joseph Smith and the angel Moroni. Why should Christians treat their own outrageous claims any differently?
Paine also points out that everything in the bible is hearsay. For example, the message at the tomb (if it happened at all) took this path, at minimum, before it got to our eyes: God, angel(s), Mary, disciples, Gospel writers, copyists, translators. (The Gospels are all anonymous and we have no original versions.).
It was never explained why faith is the best way for humans to understand the greatest truth of the Universe, when it is clear that the mechanism of faith can be used to prop up any religious belief.
If you truly believe your faith makes you a better person or stops you from raping or murdering then please carry on believing. I just find this a disturbing argument to warrant belief.
If anyone has a religious faith it is overwhelmingly likely they will have the same faith as their parents. There is a huge cultural element in any religion, which does not correspond with an objective divine plan.
It would appear that the God of the Bible has been set up in such a way as to be immune from any form of criticism. Religion has invented a disease (sin) and offers us the cure (faith). Responsibility for anything bad we may have done is passed on to a third person. Anything good about our lives comes from God, allegedly. So Christians are encouraged not to take credit for their accomplishments and not to take responsibility for their actions. And they also don’t really question why God is allowed to support slavery and genocide, when such things are abhorrent today.
Nothing to see here. Move along now. These aren’t the droids you’re looking for….
The Bible thrives on ambiguity and complexity. It’s not clear whether it’s allegory or to be taken literally. If it’s part allegory and part literal, where does the transition occur? One of the gospels draws a direct line from Adam to Jesus. Personally I think it’s likely to be almost entirely allegory. Even Mark Chapter 4 seems to be suggesting this and this was probably the first gospel written, which Matthew and Luke copied huge chunks from verbatim.
The Easter Challenge I offered could have been harder. I could have asked why reports of supernatural beings, vanishing and materializing out of thin air, long-dead corpses coming back to life, and people levitating should be given serious consideration at all. Thomas Paine was one of the first to point out that outrageous claims require outrageous proof.
Protestants and Catholics seem to have no trouble applying healthy skepticism to the miracles of Islam, or to the "historical" visit between Joseph Smith and the angel Moroni. Why should Christians treat their own outrageous claims any differently?
Paine also points out that everything in the bible is hearsay. For example, the message at the tomb (if it happened at all) took this path, at minimum, before it got to our eyes: God, angel(s), Mary, disciples, Gospel writers, copyists, translators. (The Gospels are all anonymous and we have no original versions.).
It was never explained why faith is the best way for humans to understand the greatest truth of the Universe, when it is clear that the mechanism of faith can be used to prop up any religious belief.
If you truly believe your faith makes you a better person or stops you from raping or murdering then please carry on believing. I just find this a disturbing argument to warrant belief.
If anyone has a religious faith it is overwhelmingly likely they will have the same faith as their parents. There is a huge cultural element in any religion, which does not correspond with an objective divine plan.
It would appear that the God of the Bible has been set up in such a way as to be immune from any form of criticism. Religion has invented a disease (sin) and offers us the cure (faith). Responsibility for anything bad we may have done is passed on to a third person. Anything good about our lives comes from God, allegedly. So Christians are encouraged not to take credit for their accomplishments and not to take responsibility for their actions. And they also don’t really question why God is allowed to support slavery and genocide, when such things are abhorrent today.
Nothing to see here. Move along now. These aren’t the droids you’re looking for….
One scientific study shows that prayer does not work? That is hilarious. Me thinks you simply do not understand the purpose of prayer. God is not a genie in a bottle designed to grant our every wish. Prayer is meant to align our will with His, not the other way around. You simply show that you are more willing to disbelieve and give credit to those who wish to discredit, rather than accept the fact that millions have had prayers answered and miracles happen in their lives. Science is meant to study the natural world, you know, NOT the supernatural
-
1
- Show all
Wow, a reference to Star Wars (how un-original of you), a non-atheistic worldview, since G. Lucas has gone on record and explicitly stated he believes in "God", but one more of the buddhism/hinduistic styles, or dual forces, etc - https://hollowverse.com/george-lucas/ & http://www.celebritybeliefs.com/george-lucas/
As for Thomas Paine (an imbecile as far as true intellect goes, a "fool"; "He has been called "a corsetmaker by trade, a journalist by profession, and a propagandist by inclination"."), 'extraordinary evidence'? Laughable. Jesus gave all the evidence needed (empty tomb, eyewitnesses, healings, His word, prophecy, etc.), including asking another "Thomas" to place his hands in the very wounds still visible upon the resurrected Jesus. There is also the connection to the Jesuit order:
"From Roosevelt Bayley's book I discovered that Thomas Paine was visited by Jesuits on his death bed!
page 56-57 : " At this time the Catholic inhabitants of the city enjoyed the services also of two distinguished priests : Father Anthony Kohlman, already named, and Father (afterwards Bishop) Fenwick, of the Society of Jesus. They were for several years stationed at St. Peter's Church; they afterwards had much to do with the erection of the new cathedral, and the establishment of the school known under the name of the "New-York Literary Institution," situated at the intersection of what is now known as the Fifth Avenue and Fiftieth-street. They were both men of a high order of talent, and labored most zealously in doing good. Amongst other incidents connected with their residence here, was a visit which they paid to the celebrated Thomas Paine on his death-bed. Bishop Fenwick wrote an account of the interview, which was published in the Catholic Magazine of Baltimore, October, 1846.* footnote * : I have in my possession a letter from Father Kohlman to Mother Seton, in which he alludes to this interview. He speaks of Paine as " one worried in mind, afflicted in body, and unwilling to suffer ; in fine, as given up to all the horrors of despair."" - Link
The Jesuits were the influence for the rise of such national atheism, as seen in France, Adam Weishaupt, and others. It was a plot to crush out all resistance so that they could begin again. Thesis, Anti-Thesis, Synthesis, as Hegel's dialectic was put into 'practical' use.
"... Augustin Barruel, a French Jesuit priest, wrote and published a book titled Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism in 1897, in which he claimed the French Revolution was the result of a deliberate plot to overthrow the throne and asistocratic society in Europe. Barruel blamed the Jacobins who he said adopted ideas hatched by the Freemasons. The Freemasons, according to O'Collins, are part of the Jesuit web of secret societies. ..." - Link
The book may be read here - Link
As for Thomas Paine (an imbecile as far as true intellect goes, a "fool"; "He has been called "a corsetmaker by trade, a journalist by profession, and a propagandist by inclination"."), 'extraordinary evidence'? Laughable. Jesus gave all the evidence needed (empty tomb, eyewitnesses, healings, His word, prophecy, etc.), including asking another "Thomas" to place his hands in the very wounds still visible upon the resurrected Jesus. There is also the connection to the Jesuit order:
"From Roosevelt Bayley's book I discovered that Thomas Paine was visited by Jesuits on his death bed!
page 56-57 : " At this time the Catholic inhabitants of the city enjoyed the services also of two distinguished priests : Father Anthony Kohlman, already named, and Father (afterwards Bishop) Fenwick, of the Society of Jesus. They were for several years stationed at St. Peter's Church; they afterwards had much to do with the erection of the new cathedral, and the establishment of the school known under the name of the "New-York Literary Institution," situated at the intersection of what is now known as the Fifth Avenue and Fiftieth-street. They were both men of a high order of talent, and labored most zealously in doing good. Amongst other incidents connected with their residence here, was a visit which they paid to the celebrated Thomas Paine on his death-bed. Bishop Fenwick wrote an account of the interview, which was published in the Catholic Magazine of Baltimore, October, 1846.* footnote * : I have in my possession a letter from Father Kohlman to Mother Seton, in which he alludes to this interview. He speaks of Paine as " one worried in mind, afflicted in body, and unwilling to suffer ; in fine, as given up to all the horrors of despair."" - Link
The Jesuits were the influence for the rise of such national atheism, as seen in France, Adam Weishaupt, and others. It was a plot to crush out all resistance so that they could begin again. Thesis, Anti-Thesis, Synthesis, as Hegel's dialectic was put into 'practical' use.
"... Augustin Barruel, a French Jesuit priest, wrote and published a book titled Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism in 1897, in which he claimed the French Revolution was the result of a deliberate plot to overthrow the throne and asistocratic society in Europe. Barruel blamed the Jacobins who he said adopted ideas hatched by the Freemasons. The Freemasons, according to O'Collins, are part of the Jesuit web of secret societies. ..." - Link
The book may be read here - Link