At first blush this doesn’t seem like an ‘Organized Religion’ thing. The reason I include it here is that many large religious organizations do teach it today.
Let me ask you something: Don’t you think it’s a lot easier for a leader to sneak in his own agenda when there’s no outside authority to compare it to?
Mortimer Adler, one of the greatest literary scholars, spent decades researching a book called ‘The Great Ideas.’ He read every single major piece of literature in Western history, and his book explores the 102 most influential ideas that have defined Western culture.
In the first chapter, he talks about ‘The Twentieth Century Delusion.’ What’s that? It’s the fact modern people *think* that we are more enlightened about all subjects than people were 1000 years ago.
Are we more enlightened about science and technology?
Yes.
Are we more enlightened about morality, philosophy and politics?
Hardly.
In college I took a class called ‘English Authors Before 1800.’ I was amazed at how sharp those writers were. Once you get past the ‘old English’ language, you discover that Shakespeare’s characters are just like the people you talk to every day.
The book of Proverbs in the Bible was written 3000 years ago, but its advice has saved my butt many, many times.
‘A soft answer defuses anger, but harsh words stir up evil.’
‘A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for adversity.’
‘The fool hates to be corrected by his father, but a wise son listens to advice.’
Are we really wiser in the 21st century than people were thousands of years ago?
Solomon, the author of Proverbs, said ‘There is nothing new under the sun.’ Many people have laughed at that statement. But he wasn’t talking about technology. He was talking about the issues of the human heart. Malcolm Muggeridge said, ‘News is old things happening to new people.’
So is the Bible a translation of a translation of a translation? Could it be reliable? Is it worth taking seriously?
For centuries, the oldest existing copies of the Old Testament were from 1100 AD. Because so many prophesies in the O.T. had come true, many scholars declared that it was written after the fact.
For example, Isaiah described the crucifixion of Jesus with remarkable precision, 700 years before it happened. Daniel predicted the rise and fall of the Babylonian, Persian, Greek and Roman empires, in sequence, including remarkable details – in 550 BC.
Astonishing stuff.
The skeptics had the upper hand in this debate until a boy threw rocks into a cave in the Qumran valley in 1947 and discovered what are now known as the ‘Dead Sea Scrolls.’
Not only did these scrolls date back to 200BC, proving that these astonishing predictions were written BEFORE the events took place, but the text was virtually identical to the later versions.
Similarly, we have 5,000 ancient manuscripts of the New Testament, some of them dating back to ~60 A.D. The text is unquestionably solid.
There are plenty of people who say that the Bible is flaky and full of holes, but honestly, the facts simply don’t support that conclusion.
Take the ‘Gospels’ — same-generation accounts of Jesus’ life in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. There are *no* other events in ancient history that are documented as well as Jesus’ life. If we can’t believe those history books, how can we believe any other ones?
Of course the only reason anybody doubts this stuff is that it talks about miracles. Jesus feeds 5000 people with five loaves of bread and two fishes. He heals the blind and the lame. He himself rises from the dead.
Can this be believed? Or was it just a big conspiracy?
Well, that is THE question.
Right?
Chuck Colson, a former US Government official who went to jail for his involvement in the Watergate scandal, tells this story:
“Watergate was a conspiracy to cover up, perpetuated by the closest aides to the President of the United States.
But one of them, John Dean, testified against Nixon, to save his own skin – only two weeks after informing the president about what was really going on. Two weeks!
The real cover-up, the lie, could only be held together for two weeks, and then everybody else jumped ship in order to save themselves. What’s more, nobody’s life was at stake.’
Why do I bring this up? Because conspiracies planned by big groups of people always fall apart. Somebody always narks.
Well in the case of Jesus, eleven disciples were crucified, tortured, stoned to death and burned to the stake because they stuck to their story.
They were all ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that Jesus rose from the dead.
The historical narrative reports that the first witnesses to the resurrection were women. Given the legal standing of women at that time, nobody would have written the story that way had it been made up.
What do you think?
Well, you really can’t make an informed decision until you read the story.
Fortunately there are four versions of that story — Matthew’s, Mark’s, Luke’s and John’s. Read one or all and decide for yourself.
If you don’t read the story, you’re not in any kind of position to decide. Examine the evidence so you can make an educated decision.
Tomorrow, in the last installment, I’m going to take on #7:
‘If God was really good and powerful, he wouldn’t allow so much evil and suffering to go on.’
This is a tough question indeed. Pat answers and platitudes just won’t do. I promise to handle this one with kid gloves.
Respectfully Submitted,
Perry Marshall
www.CoffeehouseTheology.com
Are we sure the church we have today is reflecting the original Church that the Lord Jesus Christ established? Don’t you think it is more counterfeit that the church from the beginning?
My question is this: Do you think what we call the Church or what we practice as Christianity today is reflecting or portraying the ORIGINAL CHURCH that the Lord Jesus Christ established? In other words, one could ask, if Matthew, Peter, Paul, Barnabas, Luke, John, etc. the first apostles who suffered and died for this faith – were they to visit the earth again to inspect what they left – will they think it is the same think in quality as they left it? Cast your eyes back to the Church at that time in comparism with what he see and experience today, even among the clergy. Is it the same? I am worried and I need an answer. Thank you.
Dear ALL
Islam is the religion of all prophetes , if we compare religions , let compare it from a common factor , like there goal , all religions want a good education for humanity , but I think islam is the only truth on this earth , the christianity when jesus was on this earth , it was islam , now the right religion is islam , all what I have written on this web site can not show the truth !!!! I have understandting why God in quran said that he is angry from jewsh and he give a name to christian as lost people , christian will never see the truth , because they are not objective even Great scientist , because they don’t want to see the truth , there selves can not accept that islam is the truth they know that islam is the truth, they don’t accept do not drinking bear , they don’t accept that commission in credit is not good , they don’t accept many good things , islam is in the middle, why the leader of the church do not maried !!! what is the problem in mariage !!! i think God never frobide good things , if we follow the leader’s of the church we will make end of this life , I think blind people never see the truth , all what said the quran happen now the ecologic problem of Global warming is said in the quran before scientist , the economic crise of today is also in the quran , why you don’t want to accept the truth ?
http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/110197
Perry,
After reading and listening to some of your presentations, I’ve noticed a few things. For one, you’ve certainly got my attention about DNA being a code, and that codes have creators and such… What I don’t agree with is that you are referring to the Christian God and the Bible. You back up your statements from scriptures of a book that I think is fallible. I think this because the Bible is supposed to be the word of God written by man. Then it was translated by man under the influence of the Holy spirit. If these two statements were true, then the bible would not have as many errors as it does. (Over 200!) But even if you were to write these off as harmless, they would still be confusing. (Which is the cause of over 30,000 different Christian denominations. Most being non-denominational. AKA “The Correct Interpretation”) Point being that if God was really trying to win souls, he wouldn’t have his instruction book as complicated as it is. And since the Bible is pretty much all you have to reference things to, I find it as invalid evidence to pin this code on the Christian God.
PS: Bacteria has DNA too.
PPS: Other religions have miracles too.
Caleb,
There are some who endeavor to resolve every single alleged contradiction in the Bible; I don’t feel this is necessary. I don’t think the Bible such as we have in English has to be perfect in order to be inspired.
In fact if we only assume that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did a merely respectable job of recording what they saw and experienced – and if we give only reasonable credence to external sources such as Tacitus, Josephus and the early church fathers – we still have a very robust case that Jesus was the son of God. That he performed many miracles for 3 years, was crucified at Passover outside of Jerusalem and that he did indeed rise from the dead.
By the way, the Bible is not the only reference we have. See http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/
There is nothing confusing about any of the basic facts. That the human race is infected with sin and that you and I add our own disease to the pile. That we all are guilty before God. And that we all crave to be healed of what ails us.
Now if you want to delve into theological nuances, then there is plenty to debate. But whether you talk to a Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Charismatic or otherwise, all agree on the Apostles Creed and the essentials of the gospel message. And the divinity of Christ and the need for us to respond.
Yes, other religions have miracles too. But there is no other claim in history for (1) God becoming man, or (2) a physical resurrection that has ever “stuck.” Jesus is absolutely unique in this regard.
Matthew 13: 10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”
11He replied, “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13This is why I speak to them in parables:
“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand. 14In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
” ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15For this people’s heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'[a] 16But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.
Respectfully, I disagree with your first statement. I do find it extremely necessary for the Bible to be accurate. I can live with translation typos, but not full on contradictions.
And indeed, there is nothing confusing about the basic facts. Every Christian believes the same basic concept of God, Jesus, the resurrection, etc. Its the other details that get mangled and misinterpreted. Which like I said in the previous post, is the reason for so many denominations. No one can agree on what the Bible is really saying. Is this fact important? Absolutely! It proves that alot of the Bibles scriptures are open-ended and cause alot of confusion. (Again, not confusion about the basic fundamentals of Christianity, but the fine print that has everything to do with where you will end up when you die.) Like homosexuality. Being destined for hell doesn’t sit so well with the gays of the world, especially when all of them agree that they have been gay all of their lives and that its not a personal choice or a “demon” as some like to say… And according to statistics, the worlds gay population could be as high as 10%! So you are faced with a question. Either all gays are going to hell, or the Bible is wrong. And since the Bible is supposed to be 100% truth and the word of God, its a bit of a problem.
I’d also like to say that even though everyone agrees that Jesus was real, it doesn’t mean he was right.
http://listverse.com/2009/04/13/10-christ-like-figures-who-pre-date-jesus/
Finally, I don’t think you can bridge the gap between Science and Religion. Mainly because the world can exist perfectly and logically under an atheists beliefs. That cant be said for religion though…
PS: If you really think about it, how many people would go to hell if Jesus were to come back today? I think it’d be safe to say well over 90% of the world! (According to standard beliefs of dying with sin on your heart…)
Caleb,
For the record, I think the Bible is extremely accurate, whether you’re talking about recorded history, archaeology, or its analysis of the human condition. I just don’t feel it has to be 100.00000% perfect. A couple of decimal places of precision is more than good enough.
Furthermore I think there is a great deal of agreement of what the Bible says. Human beings and institutions naturally emphasize their differences and their uniqueness. But regardless of denomination I think that Christian sects generally interpret 3/4ths of the Bible more or less the same.
And I don’t think the fine print has everything to do with where you go when you die. I think John 3:16 sums it up very nicely. I don’t think all gays are going to hell. Why is being gay any different than any other kind of sin, indulgence or addiction? Jesus came to heal the sick, did he not?
Science and religion: I encourage you to read my series at http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com.
But we are talking about the book of all books here. The most important physical piece of literature that will be taught to the masses and save the souls of all the world! If it is the same God that created the vastness of the universe down to the complexity of atoms and DNA, I would trust that this all-knowing God would have a better group of scholars translating it for him. I mean, lets get real… If only one part of the bible has been mistranslated, and causes a whole denomination to go to hell, who’s fault is that?
And I do not doubt that most Christian sects agree on 3/4ths of the bible. That’s pretty much a given. But since over 60% of the entire world is not Christian, and the ones who are don’t agree on that last 1/4th, there is an obvious problem.
And its funny that you mention John 3:16. Its actually a contradiction too. “…that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” I am sure they are referring to everlasting life in heaven, but technically, you’d have everlasting life in hell too…
And I’m amazed by your response to the homosexuality question…treating it like a sin or sickness that can be healed through prayer when in reality the most holy church figures in the world are preying on young boys! Not to mention that it is impossible to turn a gay person straight! But this contradicts the bible so much that you have no choice but to believe that being gay is a sin.
Google Ray Boltz…
How do you know that hell is everlasting? That one arguably falls into the category of the 1/4 that there’s not universal agreement on. Personally I think the Bible is fairly vague on this point.
Most holy church figures in the world are not preying on young boys. Surely you know better than to say that.
Much like I said in earlier comments, statements of prejudice and bigotry won’t get you very far around here. This isn’t infidels. This is a website where people expect each other to be able to back up what they say with facts.
Do you really believe that people have zero ability to shape their sexual preferences, lifestyles and behavior? Are humans really that helpless? Do you think we’re really just animals?
No offense, but are you serious? Hell is explained all through-out the Bible as eternal damnation!
Matthew 25:46 “And these will depart into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life”
Revelation 14:11 “the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever and they have no rest day and night”
Daniel 12:2 Many of those who sleep in the dusty ground will awake – some to everlasting life, and others to shame and everlasting abhorrence.
And you’ve got me all wrong about prejudice and bigotry here… My statement was that “…when in reality THE MOST holy church figures…” (Self-explanatory) I actually feel like I’ve been quite respectful sharing my opinions on the subject. And I have not written anything that cannot be proven by statistics, logic, or the Bible…
Shaping up lifestyles and behavior? Absolutely. Sexual preference? No. You may have more luck converting a bisexual person, but not a homosexual person. Its who they are. You can see it in their faces and body type. Not to mention that homosexuality has been observed in over 1500 animal species, though motivation is unknown.
And for your last question. I really don’t know! You’re articles on conscience design are really eye opening, but the Christian God nor any other Gods fit the bill. The only plausible but unclaimed theory that I have, is that the human mind cannot even begin to imagine the knowledge and technology another lifeform in the universe could possess. And since time is the only factor, ANYTHING is possible.
Caleb,
Most passages referring to hell describe it as death and destruction. I do not have a firm opinion on this myself but from what I can tell, none of the earliest church fathers before Augustine believed in an eternal hell. Personally I think one can argue this both ways.
You have been somewhat less than respectful. What does “all the most holy church figures” mean if it doesn’t mean what it says? You need to speak in specifics, not broad generalities. You’ve said a whole lot of things that cannot be backed with statistics or logic.
Sexual preference is not identity.
So you are saying that passages are confusing? No worries, there are a bunch just like that. It just depends on who you ask…
And this is the 2nd time you have misquoted what I have said and turned it into something negative… I never said that ALL of the most holy church members, I said “the most holy church members” Meaning all the Catholic priests that we’ve heard so much about on the news. Now I don’t want to get too hung up on this, but last time I checked, gay pedophilia is a pretty serious crime and “sin”. What is your explanation for this? This is kinda opposite of what priest are suppose to be doing.
What it identity then? Do you really think that homosexuals choose to be what most of the entire world despises? How much do you know about illegal drugs and the porn industry? I’d say about as much as you know about the gay population and its history. Most people who think its a sin know nothing about it. So you should check out the Wiki page.
And I also go on to ask what things I have not backed up? I’ve actually been hoping you’d respond to some of my questions instead of me addressing all of yours.
PS: Sorry for the delay, I didn’t get an email that you replied.
Dear Caleb,
Regarding your reference to hell. If you go to htpp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell you will find out a great deal of information regarding the ideology of hell. If you go down to where it says “Christianity” it explains there that Hell is from the Greek word Hades or in the Hebrew Old Testament Sheol having the same meaning “the place of the dead” or in other words the grave. I don’t agree with other aspects such as Gehenna. I agree Gehenna was a place where people burned their garbage but I don’t agree with what follows.
Either way, I don’t believe that there is a hell. And it amazes me that there are so many religions with hell. But like I said, the same bible that every christian reads has the same scriptures that I posted earlier. Whether or not you choose to believe one over the other is actually irrelevant since the bible is wrong anyway.
I’ve noticed that you haven’t replied to anything I’ve stumped you on too.
PS: I thought this was a funny coincidence on yahoo news today…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_rel_religious_literacy_poll
Dear Caleb,
My thoughts, hopes and understanding relating to the scriptures you have highlighted is as follows…
Matthew 25:46 “And these will depart into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
I hope for the sake of all those who show no love nor compassion for others as the parable given by Jesus relates might mean for as long as these people do not develop the personality needed for peace on earth they will not be fit to be part of the new creation and will be forsaken because God is all knowing and cannot judge wrongly. Therefore these people have no hope of eternal life unless they develop the new personality defined in Galatians 5:22 “love; joy; peace; long-suffering; kindness; goodness; faith; mildness and self control.”
Revelation 14:11 “the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever and they have no rest day and night”.
This verse relates to me that those who refuse to acknowledge the Heavenly Kingdom and the righteous rule spoken of throughout this chapter will not be permitted to defy God’s standards and will no more be permitted to make decisions countermanding the will of God. And will be punished eternally because just like Satan there will not be a place in the promised new earth for people who will not contribute fully to a world free from suffering, sickness, pain and starvation.
Daniel 12:2 Many of those who sleep in the dusty ground will awake – some to everlasting life, and others to shame and everlasting abhorrence.
Again this has a similar meaning to the other two verses you have quoted. This appears to me to be condemning those who refuse to accept Michael the Great Prince and will thus be condemned to death and will no more be allowed to work against salvation.
You mention homosexuality too. I will leave that discussion for now. Perhaps later if you would like my views on the subject. Hope my understandig helps you. Of couse this is my interpretation and really all true interpretation belongs to God. 2nd Peter 1:19;20 “No prophecy of scripture springs from private interpretation for prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit”.
This to me means that so long as what I reveal in discussion is the truth based on the true meaning of the scriptures it is acceptable to God. I hope what I have written is correct however it would be in everyones interest to read the bible and pray for God to help them personally understand by means of Holy Spirit.
Ok… You’re interpretation of the quote from Revelation still says that hell is eternal. “And will be punished eternally because just like Satan…” But just in case that’s not what you meant, does that mean that sinners don’t burn forever in hell? That alot of denominations are teaching the wrong concept? And that I can pretty much do what I want?
Sometime you gotta sit back and think…is this reality? Is what the bible says really fit to what we know and see today?
And here is my ultimate undeniable statement:
If Jesus were to really come back soon like everyone has been saying, statistically God has lost this fight. There are over twice as many non-christians that would go to hell (or not go to heaven…) And since God supposedly knows everything, he knew ahead of time that this would happen. So either God is not all knowing, or he doesn’t exist. Honestly, if he exists, he really doesn’t know what he is doing… My example:
God created everything, but he didn’t see it coming when SOMEHOW Lucifer became corrupted IN HEAVEN. Not only did he banish him to earth, a third of the angels went with him. (So God created Lucifer. There was sin in heaven. And then he put him on earth where he’d so lovingly create Adam and Eve later.)
So the story goes that Satan tempted Eve and ruined everything for mankind. From then on, God has had his hands full trying to clean up the mess he made by putting Satan here. (Noah’s flood, Jesus…) But alas, Satan is still running rampant. The bible says that Satan will eventually be cast into the bottomless pit, but is that punishment really worth the countless souls he took with him? Why didn’t he just not-create him instead of making things so complicated.
Does this sound like a sane story to you? No, it sounds like the mindset of people living thousands of years ago trying to scare people into being good. And if other religions can brainwash people. Christianity most certainly can.
If you don’t think that Ireland saved Christianity check out the bookm How the Irish Saved Civilization. Basic thrust during the 1500 another religion was doing agreat job of wiping Christianity from memorey. They burned churches, killed Christians and last but not least banned the Bible ordering all Bibles be burn. But in Ireland there were friars who spent their time sitting on a hill – all their time. They passed the time by copying the Bible. If that hadn’t happened the Bible could probably would have disappeared from the Earth. I think it would be hard to negate the importance of their contribution to the survival of the Bible.
It has been my understanding, that christianity came about through St.Patrick. He killed non christians, but then again I can see you want to believe your version of history, and not real history, so this conversation is pointless.
Brianisha,
Where did you get that very strange and false “history” of Christianity? Christianity came about through Jesus Christ, long before St. Patrick. There is only one version of history. Jesus Christ is actually the most documented person in human history. If you do the research, you will find this is true.
have you ever seen the movie shutter island? there are atheists that would do just that to a person of religion. Mind you, Im a Pagan and not an atheist, because I see atheists as an extreme. I may agree with them most of the time, but when it comes to the supernatural, that is where me and the atheists dont see eye to eye.
Supernatural things are defined as things that cannot be tested or proven by science. But the vast majority of the world believes in supernatural occurrences.(Almost all religions) Here is where it gets tricky… Everyone claims to see, hear, or feel different things. But if only one religion is right, then the others must be wrong… That draws a big problem. If one is right, which one is it? Does this make the other believers of other religions liars or extremely misguided? I’d say the latter… They can’t all be right, but they all swear they are. Proven point that people CAN be brainwashed.
“Respectfully, I disagree with your first statement. I do find it extremely necessary for the Bible to be accurate. I can live with translation typos, but not full on contradictions. ”
Caleb, we have to make a distinction between what the author(s) of the Bible is(are) are saying and what the readers think it(they) are telling us. Let’s distinguish between the real message and the interpretation. Interpretations, let’s admit, are contradictory. The message of the Bible is yet to be proven as being contradictory. For that we will need to interview the author(s).
“And indeed, there is nothing confusing about the basic facts. Every Christian believes the same basic concept of God, Jesus, the resurrection, etc. Its the other details that get mangled and misinterpreted. Which like I said in the previous post, is the reason for so many denominations. No one can agree on what the Bible is really saying. Is this fact important? Absolutely! It proves that alot of the Bibles scriptures are open-ended and cause alot of confusion. (Again, not confusion about the basic fundamentals of Christianity, but the fine print that has everything to do with where you will end up when you die.)”
I agree with you. It gives the impression that the Bible is open-ended and cause a lot of confusion. It gives rise to the questions of : How should be believe and what should we believe? How do we make sense of the Bible?
But maybe (and this is just a speculative effort), revelation was never meant to be a one-shot deal after which everything becomes 100% clear and fully understood and there is no more room for speculation, research, reflection, study, doubt and disagreement. I can respect your feelings about it if you say that it is totally unsatisfactory and unbecoming of the God who reveals and saves. If there is God, really, he must reveal and save perfectly because God is perfect and must do everything perfectly well. All these difficulties entailed in Christian beliefs betray the lack of a perfect God who is able to reveal and save in a perfect manner. In this kind of thinking, perfection implies the total absence of everything that is negative. I respect the feeling but I disagree with the thinking.
I will address this in another post.
“Like homosexuality. Being destined for hell doesn’t sit so well with the gays of the world, especially when all of them agree that they have been gay all of their lives and that its not a personal choice or a “demon” as some like to say… And according to statistics, the worlds gay population could be as high as 10%! So you are faced with a question. Either all gays are going to hell, or the Bible is wrong. And since the Bible is supposed to be 100% truth and the word of God, its a bit of a problem.”
Christianity teaches that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong and that the homosexual tendency, although disordered, is not sinful. Sin is rooted in choosing what is wrong, disordered, bad or evil, knowing that it is so. Our lifestyle is a product of choice. Our tendencies, not always.
I have always had a tendency to be unfaithful to my wife, in varying degrees. That doesn’t make me a sinner. When I am able to faithfully say ‘no’ to the tendency for the sake of God, that is a virtue. I sin when I surrender to the tendency to do evil, knowing that it is evil.
Are all homosexuals going to hell? Only God can tell. Is homosexuality a real obstacle to loving God? Yes. Is that a real obstacle to being with God forever in eternal bliss. Yes. If one is a homosexual is he definitely going to hell. I can’t answer that. Particular judgement is the exclusive domain of God.
“I’d also like to say that even though everyone agrees that Jesus was real, it doesn’t mean he was right.”
You’re correct because Jesus is right not because everyone agrees with him but because HE IS.
“Finally, I don’t think you can bridge the gap between Science and Religion.”
There are many Christians, like the Catholics, who are not trying to do this. They say, though, that there is no contradiction between the two. Religion is concerned with an entirely different set of questions than the one with which the physical sciences are concerned. If there is a seeming contradiction between the two, you can be sure that one is encroaching into the other’s domain.
The question of God is not a question addressed by physics, chemistry etc. These sciences are concerned with the empirical. The question of God is metaphysical. When the physical seems to support (ie is consistent or coherent with)the metaphysical that should be no cause for surprise.
“Mainly because the world can exist perfectly and logically under an atheists beliefs.”
I disagree. It is only possible to live in the world under atheistic beliefs because atheistic beliefs are inconsistent.
I will try to demonstrate this in another post.
If you don’t mind, I have one important question. Now, as it’s said, God’s ultimate aim is that we should all be leading a truly faithful life while on earth so that in the end of our life, He will allow us to be with Him in heaven. That means He do not want us to do anything against another person, I’m sure not even if they are of other religious faith or race, or even if they are atheists. He will judge us on all our doings on earth on judgment day while we were alive. But why is it that Islam’s Allah tells Muslims to kill those of other religions, or kill the Muslims who converts to other religion? Isn’t it so that He will judge us when we die; and not when we are here on earth, the Muslims already do the judgment for Allah? People can only be judged on stealing, murder, rape and so on, but not just because the person is not with their religion. If Allah wants to do that, then why did he put people here and then ask the Muslims to kill? It doesn’t make sense. Want to judge us, do it only when we die, not before. If any Muslims were to say I am wrong about that Islam says about killing the non Muslims, why can’t the Al’Qaeda know it? Don’t tell me they read a different Quran or don’t understand it?
ESP
If the the Quran encourages followers to kill those of other religions, or kill the Muslims who convert to other religions, then the teaching of the Quran is wrong. Are you sure this is the truth? Is it not people of the Muslim nationality who don’t know and live up to the teachings of the Quran that carry out such atrocities just as people belonging to the religions of Christendom have done throughout the ages?
When trouble flares up in the middle east and we see countries enveloped in war we can justfiably be alarmed. If you go to info@ucg.org you can order free booklets and magazines. One booklet “The Middle East in Bible Prophecy is well worth reading”.
The Bible at Mathew 24:6 quotes the words Jesus spoke referring to the Last Days “You are going to hear of wars and reports of wars Matthew 24:21,22 For there will be great tribulation such as has not occurred since the worlds beginning until now, no, nor will occur again. In fact unless those days were cut short no flesh would be saved; but on account of the chosen ones those days will be cut short.
The book of Daniel prophecied all the kingdoms of the earth down to our day Daniel 12:10 “Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will certainly act wickedly, and no wicked ones at all will understand”. God said to the Israelites through Isaiah the prophet Isaiah 1:15-19 “Even though you make many prayers I am not listening, with bloodshed your very hands have become filled. Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean; remove the badness of your dealings from in front of my eyes; cease to do bad; learn to do good; search for justice; set right the oppressor render justice and set matters straight between us.”
I believe that all people on earth today are required to look to God and scripture for guidance. I believe we must plead the cause of the afflicted on earth today and have faith in the coming salvation of God because this world holds no guarantees but God promises salvation to all who seek to do his will and be part of a peaceful earth as promised.
Its funny you mentioned daniel. I met a guy who claimed to be daniel. I believed him, and I watched him change, he went from neutral to evil. I realize, many people believe the bible to be true, and I believe that the bible IS outdated, and the many books Ive read, besides the bible, have helped me understand christianity, like the dark side of christian history and ten things ive learned wrong from a conservative church. Mind you, Paganism, Hinduism and Buddhism make no mention of Jesus, so it makes me conclude he never existed.
God, your Father, loves you very much, more than the human mind is capable of comprehending. I might not understand your pain but He does. Give Him a chance. God is unchanging. Therefore, the “Spirit” of His word can never become out-dated, regardless of the age of the letter of His Word.
What you have said about Jesus not existing is like saying, since Christianity and native American Indian religions make no mention of Buddha, then Buddha never existed. Well, perhaps he didn’t. There is plenty of evidence that Jesus lived in the flesh. No-one in the history of man has been more documented than Jesus Christ. There exists more evidence for Jesus Christ than any other historical figure, like Alexander the Great, for whom there is very little, if any, solid evidence. Yet few seem to question that Alexander existed.
Few question that Buddha existed. Why is that? The answer is because Buddha was not Christ. Buddha was not God made flesh. He was not the Messiah who redeemed us from sin. He was incapable of accomplishing anything close to what Jesus accomplished. Therefore, satan gains little by driving people away from Buddha. But satan gains a soul every time it drives someone away from Christ.
Do we need to have another contest, such as the one where Elijah stood up to 400 pagan priests of Baal before people will believe in God, again? That would be awesome. But then, God has already given us all the evidence we need to make the “right” choice.
There is no evidence for the existence of the biblical man named Jesus.Luke 1:1-4 tells us that the writer ‘recieved’ the information that he writes about from someone else. He makes no claim to have been a witness to the things which he writes about.But he did examine carefuly, that ‘which many had had a hand in’ and decided that it was true.He had faith in someone elses writing. Probably another scripture.Origin unknown,author unknown, date of writing, unknown.The ‘faith’ existed, that much we can say for sure, but as for the man that the faith is based on,most probly never existed.Christianity relies also on Pauls testimony. He most probably did exist.But he also never knew Jesus.His claim to have had a vision is unverifiable.Not fit to be used as evidence of the existence of Jesus. He also talks about scriptures in his letters to the churches.This is some time before any of the gospels of Matt, Mark, Luke and John were written, so Paul is not speaking of them in any of his letters.He seems to be talking about already existing scriptures, believed in by many, years before any of the gospels as we know them were written.This suggests that the ‘faith’ existed many years before the time ascribed to the biblical Jesus.
As for Eligah.It should be remembered that he actualy slaughtered, with his own hand,those priests of Baal,(400), and their wives and children.This is one of those verses in the OT that Christianity used, during the Dark Ages, when it asked the question,
“What does the bible say should be done with the non-believer?”
Such religeous intolerence as demonstrated by Eligah has been a tool of Christianity during its periods of persecution.
There is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of the Jealous God of Moses. Exodus 20:5.also Exodus 34:14.There is not even evidence for the existence of Moses.Belief in this God has surely been a curse upon mankind thru-out history, and continues to be so to this day in the form of Islamic Fundametalism.
“There is no evidence for the existence of the biblical man named Jesus.”
A statement so thoroughly uninformed as to not merit further comment. Please display your capacity for denial on someone else’s website.
“There is no evidence for the exitence of the biblical man known as Jesus.”
Such a comment does not merit firther comment. Always been a good Christian argument.Just take it all for granted.The old questions have never been answered. There is some vague idea that someone like Jesus may have existed at the time ascribed to Jesus.
But on reading Luke I realise that the writer tells us that he was not a witness to the things he writes about.He tells us that “many had taken a hand” in putting together that which he has faith in.He has examined it, and believes it to be true.We do not know who those ” many who had had a hand”in producing the document that Luke mentions We do not know who the writer of Luke was, or for that matter, any of the other gospel writer
Also with Paul. He never knew Jesus. We have to take his word for it that he had had a vision.
You’re right. Jesus never existed. Just as long as we make sure we ignore Thallos, Pliny the Younger, Suetonius, Tacitus, Mara Bar Serapion, Lucian of Samosata, Celcus; and the Jewish references to Jesus outside the New Testament: Josephus, rabbinic tradition, Toledot Yeshu – as long as we make sure we don’t look at any of those sources, you’re correct, we can be quite sure that Jesus never existed.
If someone questions the legitimacy of Jesus’ claim to be the son of god – this doesnt make them some agent of satan (” satan gains little by driving people away from Buddha. But satan gains a soul every time it drives someone away from Chris”) as you put it – just someone that has used all the available information and evidence,
and come up with an answer different to yours! To dress doubt and skeptism up as some ‘agent of evil’ just demonstrates the fear and lack of confidence in actual empirical evidence for christianity that some people still have – one would hope we have progressed since the time of the Spanish Inquisition!
“God has already given us all the evidence we need to make the “right” choice”
Why would god create such a cryptic little test? It is of course very convenient for the indoctrinated to use ‘faith’ as some catch all answer to indoctrinate the next generation – but that is, ultimately what all religions do, christianity is not unique and has no more legitamcy than any other. So why should i belive in a christian god not a muslim or Hindu or sikh one?
Re: “To dress doubt and skeptism up as some ‘agent of evil’ just demonstrates the fear and lack of confidence in actual empirical evidence for christianity”
Absurd!
Re: “Why would god create such a cryptic little test?”
Answer: So that there will never be another satan. You are given a choice. Choose wisely.
Why is it absurd? Debate is about giving reasons in a logical and clear way! At the moment your reasons seem to be that you have somehow witnessed something so fantastic (although you give no detailas) and amazing from god that you know it is all true! What ever it was, it clearly wasn’t the power of reason and debate!
Are those people living in non christian countries given a choice? Were people who lived before the life of Jesus given a choice? It makes very little sense!
Tim,
Re: “Why is it absurd?”
Because it’s nowhere close to the truth.
When we are given a light, we can put it under a basket. Or, we can share the light. Yes, I have witnessed something fantastic. What I have found is that it does not matter how this light is shared. I have shared photos, given testimony, healed by the Holy Spirit, etc, etc. Yet, there are always those who doubt and some even make viscious attacks on the messenger. So, I no longer share things, like photographs. People just accuse me of Photoshop edits. Either you believe me; or you do not. If you believe me, it’s because the Father has opened your eyes.
Yes, all are given a choice: to serve God; or to not. With about 2 billion Christians on the planet, very few people have never heard of Jesus Christ.
A strange response by someone so convinced of their own self rightiousness. Who are others to make judgments of your evidence? Surely only god can judge you? To apparantly have been blessed by having these amazing experiences and then refusing to share evidence because of a fear of being ridiculed by skeptics and non-believers,seems utterly contradictory to your overriding message of spreading the message of christianity and helping people find salvation.
“Either you believe me; or you do not” Why should your word be worth so much when you are not prepared to share all your information? It seems utterly baffling as well as arogant!
Re: “Surely only god can judge you?”
That is correct.
I am far from convinced of my own self-righteousness. There is no-one who is righteous. No-one who is good, especially not me.
The saying, “Either you believe me or you do not” is not intended as arrogance. It’s simply saying that there is nothing I can do that will convince anyone whose eyes and ears are not already opened to what I am talking about. This is no different for you or anyone else.
If my eyes and ears are not open to what you are saying then neither will I hear what you say. Does that make you arrogant?
I do not refuse to share. I have done that repeatedly. Many who I share with have appreciated these things but I have also been attacked by satan through those who hate the truth.
You have to understand most non believers were raised christian. My husband pointed out to me that most christians dont read more than 10% of their bibles, and probably about 1% if any practice what they preach. WHat Im seeing here is a lot of judging, and a lot of arrogance. Say what you want about non believers and non christians, but most of us have been through christianity and came out wanting something else.
Brianish,
If you have read less than 10% of your bible and have practiced less than 1% of what is taught, then it’s not surprising that you have fallen away.
Is it arrogant to voice what we believe? If so, then are you not being arrogant and judgemental of those who believe? Why do you apply a double standard? Why are you reading these posts and posting if your mind is already made up?
This is something that baffles me. Why do atheists go out of their way to attack Christians? Yes, Christians tend to attack things that go against their beliefs but it’s usually in response to an attack by atheism. For instance, not allowing Christian children to talk about God in school but forcing them to accept things that go against their faith, such as homosexuality. Double standards, again. If the atheists would stop forcing their “religion”, or system of belief (non-belief?), on Christians, we would all get along much better.
But I tell you that if you were in a country, like Egypt, you would be rooting for the Christian minority because they are all that stands between atheists and Islamic Sharia law. Trust me, if you are an atheist, you will be much happier living with Christians than under Islamic law. If you value freedom of (or from) religion, then you had better start backing the Christians and stop attacking your greatest ally, in terms of freedom.
Well, it looks like there is no bother replying since my messages were deleted. I guess blasphemy doesnt hold too well with you huh? Either way, I stumped you Perry. Many times. And it was easy.
Caleb,
My time for this site is very limited. Your messages were not deleted. I will respond as I’m able.
For me, the bible has been nothing but trouble. I have a mother and aunt that cant get along because of Jesus, I was almost beaten by four street preachers, and too many people use the bible to hurt others. I am an ex christian, and I wouldnt change it for the world, because my own experiences teach me a great deal more than Jesus or the bible. As for dont blame a many because of a few, I think that Im blaming many for the actions of many thank you.
It’s not Jesus who causes division but the enemy that seeks to drive people away from Him. Why is it that whenever something bad happens, people blame God or Jesus or, somehow, find it reason to believe He doesn’t exist? That’s exactly what the one who seeks to drag you into the abyss wants you to believe. Don’t be deceived. Jesus and the Father love you with all of their being. They are One.
As for the Gnostic Gospels, if the bible isnt true, what makes you think they are as well? to me, either Jesus existed, or he didnt. But I tend to think he didnt, because there is no solid proof he did, and no tombstone or body.
Why do you seek the living among the dead? Jesus exists. He lives. As he was and is and will be.
People should be looking for the spirit within, and not Jesus or christ conciousness, that is why there is so much confusion, people would rather worship the finger pointing at the moon, than to look within.
Brianisha,
You are correct that we should seek the Spirit of God within. But the Father, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are One. Therefore, seek all three within as One. You are so close to the awesome experience of finding the Creator within and knowing the Oneness. Give Christ a chance and you will see. This is what Jesus prayed for on your behalf in the garden during His passion.
Oh, as far as intelligence and spirituality goes, people were the most spiritual in the 1700s, when Diesm was popular. Yes Diesm, not christianity. the 1700s was an era of many prodigies, most of them non christians.
The origins of Christianity.
Luke 1:1-4. The writer of the gospel according to Luke tells us that he was not a witness to the things that he writes about. He tells us that “many had had a hand” in putting together the things that they had faith in.He had examined it all very carefully and, he tells us that he believes it to be truth.He does not tell us who those “many who had had a hand” in putting it all together were.He appears to be refering to some earlier scripture.Most Christians belief that he “recieved” his information from some of the apostles, but he does not tell us that that is the case. The fact is that we do not know were he got his information from.
If the writer of Luke did copy from an earlier, unknown scripture, then perhaps so did all the other gospel writers, and that could explain the similarities of some of the writings.If the writer of Luke is copying from some other earlier scripture, then were does that leave The Acts of the Apostles, as they are believed to have been wrote by the same person? Perhaps that also was second hand information.
So are we to believe that every biographer who wasn’t there at the time is a liar?
And what are we to make of John, who said
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4 We write this to make our[a] joy complete.
John 1.’In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God….’ etc.
Originally part of the Platonic Phiolosophy, dated about 280BC. Borrowed by the writer of John. Not his own words.
Chritianity borrowed much from the ancient Pagans.
I do say that these writers are lairs. But they do tell us that what they write about comes from somewhere else.They do not tell us where that is.
So what? The original writers of scriptures were not liars and just because their writings were later edited by others still does not make them liars. Plus, you don’t go back far enough. Where did the ancient pagans get their traditions from? Where did Plato borrow his writing from? Try starting with people, like Enoch. Pagans were the first borrowers. Just because something was used by ancient pagans doesn’t mean it originated with them and doesn’t mean Christians later borrowed it back. Your argument holds no water. After you have researched the topic for a few years, come back and debate it.
Regardless, those who don’t believe in Christ, now, will certainly believe in the next life…
Haha… Your argument holds no water Jim! Debating a Christian using the only piece of evidence that they use (aka The Bible) is a piece of cake. There are plenty of logical reasons to doubt the bible. But not too many logical reasons to believe in it. When you get down to it, all the bible does is program weak minded individuals to become civilized. Definitely worth its weight in gold 2000 years ago…
If God is so real in peoples lives then why is it so hard to convince the rest of the world he is? I mean come on… The only observable thing happening in Christianity, or religion for that matter, is that people can be made to believe ANYTHING! I’m really happy for people that feel good thinking that God is in control of their lives, but reality and statistics tell a different story… There is NO evidence that God exists. If you think there is, please explain something that doesn’t have to do with psychology… And I’ll gladly pass it on to the millions of other skeptics just like me. I’ll even give you the same deal you gave Robert. A few years for research. Then we’ll see the water it holds.
PS: “Regardless, those who don’t believe in Christ, now, will certainly believe in the next life…”
…A bold statement usually made by Christians as a final argument to scare people with Hell. To give you some insight, 66% of the world does not believe in the Christian God. That’s 4.5 billion out of 6.8 billion people. (The population of the U.S is only 311 million.) And also, supposedly…not all Christians believe in the terrible traditional hell you are probably referring to. Perry doesn’t… But you can take that debate up with him.
Caleb,
If it was only the Bible that I have for evidence of God and Jesus Christ, I probably would not believe. As it is, I’ve witnessed and been involved in miracles that prove beyond doubt. In addition, I see spirits, such as angels, etc. I have photos and videos of them. So, I have no excuse not to believe. Apparently, you do have an excuse. To each his own. No-one can make another believe something they don’t want to believe.
For those who don’t believe in hell, it is definitely real, as real as satan. And so is Heaven, as real as God. If you don’t believe in God, then that’s your choice. Yes, the old adage, “If you don’t believe now, you will when you get there.”
Share these photos and videos then please – so we can be as fortunate as you!
Not sure exactly what kind of miracle you are talking about – but Derron Brown, a one time evangelical christian and now a highly respected British illusionist / hypnotist has made a few documentaries exposing the business of so called miracles. i’ts definately worth a watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYjgeayfYPI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ02I6QyagM
Tim,
There are undoubtedly many fake miracles out there. The miracles documented in the professional refereed publication Southern Medical Journal in September 2010 are not illusion. Neither are any of the rest of the ones described at http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/miracles/ – see that page for all relevant links.
There has never been a single miricle confirmed by science. The miricles outlined in the southern medical journal are the kinds of things that have been observed in all faiths. Actually it is just an extension of the phenomena that is debunked in the video links above. The power of faith and positive thinking is undeniable – but it doesn’t make it a miracle.
It appears as though you have a position that miracles cannot exist. From your comments it seems you will not accept any evidence to the contrary – even blind people seeing and deaf people hearing immediately following prayer, as confirmed by peer-reviewed scientific studies. Am I correct?
I am open to anything proved by science, on the contrary you are closed to anything that disproves what you want to believe.
Watch those videos – it explains, and demonstrates, the miracle phenomina quite clearly. And is a far more logical and scientific answer than any divine intervention.
Tim, you will need to spell this out clearly. Please indicate where in the video (minutes:seconds) where Derren Brown performs a documented healing. By that I mean producing a 10-60dB medically verified improvement in hearing sensitivity, or a 10:1 improvement in vision, such as described by Southern Medical Journal.
It’s rare that any serious scientist attempts to validate a miracle and even fewer are present when one happens. But then, I am a scientist/engineer who has witnessed and also worked miracles that have been validated by physicians, surgeons. Miraculous healings that have no explanation in medical science.
How do you explain how a man who had been deaf in one ear for 20 years after a bomb blast suddenly regaining his hearing – instantly?
How do you explain cancer being healed, just from a touch?
How do you explain a kinked artery being instantly straightened with new blood vessels attached, in place of ones that had died? Imagine the shock on the surgeons face when he made the incision to insert an arterial stent but stopped and declared, “I don’t need to do this!”
How do you explain a man (who is a physician btw) with a lame hip and one leg shorter than the other having his hip healed and the short leg “stretched” to match the longer leg – instantly?
How do you explain a severe stomach ulcer being healed, instantly?
How do you explain a woman with dementia having her clarity of mind and memory restored – instantly?
How do you explain severe infections being healed simply by prayer and touch?
Should I go on? All of these healings were accomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit. Nothing in medical science can do any of these things. Only a much higher power can accomplish this.
But why try to convince someone whose eyes and ears are not opened to the truth? I say you must be searching or you would not be on this site. I pray that your eyes and ears are opened and you are shown the truth.
Having personally witnessed some of these things myself, I concur with everything Jim is saying here.
btw – I have worked healings by the Holy Spirit and I know nothing whatsoever about illusionist trickery. Those things do happen but it’s the evil one who works or inspires the deception in order to cause people to doubt and disbelieve the truth.
Re: “To give you some insight, 66% of the world does not believe in the Christian God.”
Yes, I already know that. It’s also prophesied in Revelation of John. It’s sad that 66% will perish. I hope to find a way to prevent that. But those who hate me might find it difficult to understand why.
Ok… now you are losing me… You actually have scientific evidence of things considered as pseudoscience? I’d ask for proof, but I have a feeling that I’ll never see it… I’d look into carbon monoxide poisoning. It was the cause of most haunted houses back in the day.
And about the 66% quote… It’d be more like 90% would perish. At best! Not all 33% that consider themselves Christian will go to Heaven…
Caleb,
I never said anything about scientific evidence. I said photos and video. I don’t know anything about haunted houses. For that go watch Ghost Hunters on TV. Of course, they have no idea what they’re doing.
Regarding the carbon monoxide comment, I don’t mind having respectful discussions but this comment is one of disrespect. Why should I listen to you or continue such a thread of discussion?
Photos and video evidence is pretty hardcore stuff. If you had legitimate proof that there was another realm beyond this one, then not only would you have the single most important thing on the planet, but you’d reopen a branch of science that has been shut down for years.
My comment could be taken negatively, but it was just a simple fact. My offer still stands on the proof though.
There is ample photos and video evidence at http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/miracles/
I would reply with this…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle#Claims_of_miracles
…and how many other religions have miracles too.
Yes, other religions have miracles too. Even the Bible teaches this.
Did you read my article? Did you investigate the reports? Did you read the paper in Southern Medical Journal?
You are referring to the paper in the Southern Medical Journal that in its conclusion states –
“Although it would be unwise to overgeneralize from these preliminary findings for a small number of PIP practitioners and subjects collected in far-from-ideal field conditions”
?? yes I did. have you?
Agreed there is some vague correlation in that study, but nothing whatsoever that suggests a miracle. Other scientific studies find the complete opposite.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1072638.ece
Are you just choosing to give credence to the ones that agree with your agenda?
So, Help me understand this. In your understanding – those that live very productive kind, considerate lives without christianity are doomed (lets say, buddhist monks in the north east of Thailand who have never really come into contact with christianity) – but those, for example, who were ‘lucky’ enough to be be born in a christian country and have (very conveniently) found god in prison after being convicted of peadeophilia, will be saved?
Is that fair? is it right? Jim, try to give an answer to explain this that doesn’t refer to your experience of seeing miracles – as I think this website was created to have some kind of logical and rational debate on christianity.
I deal with that question at http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/top10/#8
I believe Perry’s answers to this question are correct. It’s not as simple as we might like it to be but for a good reason.
A Buddhist monk who knows about Jesus Christ but rejected Him is subject to judgement. Since I am not one with authority to judge, I cannot say how he will be judged. But we can surmise his fate. Jesus said that no-one comes to the Father but by Him. He also said that, one who denies Him, He will deny before the Father.
But within the context of this thread of discussion, the comment was about 66% of people not believing in God, i.e. atheist. Most atheists have heard of God and even of Jesus Christ but have rejected Him. Few people have not heard of Him. One who willfully rejects Jesus Christ also rejects the Holy Spirit, because Christians believe they are one. It is written that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven in this life or in the next. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is rejection of the Holy Spirit.
By inference, then most, or all, atheists are subject to judgment. There are many who say they believe in God, or a God, but do not keep His commands. One cannot be a Christian without believing in Jesus Christ. One cannot say they believe in Jesus Christ if they reject and do not keep His commands.
It matters not how many good works a person does. If they reject God, then they are subject to judgment. Is this fair? Is this right? Yes it is. Satan used to be an angel, called Lucifer. He had everything but rejected God. That’s why we fight this war with satan and its minions. Rejection of God is a serious thing and one who rejects God has chosen the path that leads away from God’s Kingdom. It’s their own choice.
Seems then, to be born into the bible belt states of America is bit of an advantage compared to being born in a slum next to the ganges in India!! And not just materially but also spiritually as well. They may have heard of Jesus but to go against their culture and religion – to become an outsider from their family and community – would be a far far harder thing to do than just continue the relgion of their family and dominant religion in society (as most Americans only have to do!).
Not really a fair test is it? Surely someone as amazing and good and fair as god and jesus could have designed something a bit more equal!
Being born in the Bible belt is an advantage for getting 3 square meals a day, too. It ceases to be an advantage when you are held reponsible for all you know.
When asked what would happen to John, Jesus asked, “What is to you if I let him live until I return?”
Re: “to be born into the bible belt states of America is bit of an advantage ”
Yes, it is. There are many in India who are persecuted and killed because of their faith in Jesus Christ. Most Christians in the USA do not know true persecution.
We, in the USA, are not being burned alive in churches, hacked to death with machettes by hindu or muslim mobs, nor thrown into prison because of our faith. So, being born in the USA is advantageous; but we are accountable for what we know; and we know that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the Way, the Truth, and the Life; and He is the only way to the Father.
Those who are martyred becvause of their faith, in countries like India, Pakistan, Kenya, North Korea, etc, know this and are willing to die a physical death rather than compromise on the Truth. They precede us to the Kingdom.
I just wanted to comment that “Lucifer” is not another name for Satan. Very very common misconception. Lucifer actually means Light bearer/bringer in Latin. The chemical in lightning bugs that makes the light is called Luciferis. The morning star is also another name in common with Lucifer. The Latin church also says the word lucifer in it to describe Jesus as the morning star in one of their hymns. Lower case of course though…
Re: “… that “Lucifer” is not another name for Satan.”
Correct. The evil one, called satan, was once called Lucifer but lost that name when it became a devil.
I’ll elaborate…
“The Bible does not name the devil as Lucifer. The use of this name in reference to the devil stems from an interpretation of Isaiah 14:3-20, a passage that does not speak of any fallen angel but of the defeat of a particular Babylonian King, to whom it gives a title that refers to what in English is called the Day Star or Morning Star (in Latin, lucifer). In 2 Peter 1:19 and elsewhere, the same Latin word lucifer is used to refer to the Morning Star, with no relation to the devil. It is only in post-New Testament times that the Latin word Lucifer was used as a name for the devil, both in religious writing and in fiction, especially when referring to him prior to his fall from Heaven.”
Correct: “How art thou fallen from heaven , O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!” Isaiah 14:12, KJV
So, what exactly is your point? I’m not getting what you’re trying to prove.
(light‐bearer) found in Isaiah 14:12 coupled with the epithet “son of the morning,” clearly signifies a “bright star,” and probably what we call the morning star. In this passage it is a symbolical representation of the king of Babylon in his splendor and in his fall. Its application, from St. Jerome downward, to Satan in his fall from heaven arises probably from the fact that the Babylonian empire is in Scripture represented as the type of tyrannical and self idolizing power, and especially connected with the empire of the Evil One in the Apocalypse.
You are still reading it out of context. Lucifer is the translation for day star. The day star is Venus. It just so happens that Venus is also Lucifer. Venus is the brightest object in the sky after the sun and moon. When it is referring to the day star falling from heaven, its talking about Venus’ trek across the sky. Lucifer is only used twice in the bible. Both times referring to the day star. KJV is one of very few bibles that use Lucifer instead of day star in those passages.
Caleb,
For an atheist, you seem to believe you are quite the biblical scholar and an expert in things you don’t even believe in.
Perry,
One of your readers claims you don’t believe hell exists. Is this true?
I never said that.
Traditional Hell is the eternal suffering place we once discussed…
“I do not have a firm opinion on this myself but from what I can tell, none of the earliest church fathers before Augustine believed in an eternal hell. Personally I think one can argue this both ways.”
So if hell isn’t eternal suffering, then who cares!?
Why don’t you put your hand under boiling water for, oh, ten seconds & let’s see who cares.
I didn’t believe so. Perhaps, this addresses the assertion Caleb Culberson made, above.
Actually no. It doesn’t address it. We never came to an agreement on anything. Of all of the subjects we’ve debated about on this page, most of my questions go half or completely unanswered, and most just end with no reply. I call that winning. I try not to be disrespectful and I’m pretty sure I’ve never gotten mad. I just offer facts, an alternative perspective, and moderate criticism. From my point of view, I do not understand what makes you believe in something so strongly that could very well be false. Other religions are in the same boat with you. I believe what I believe because what you believe just doesn’t make sense to me. And it all boils down to just faith. Believing in something without proof. And there definitely is no proof. I’ve looked. I’ve prayed. And then I googled. Seeing both sides of the story really changes things. After all of the evidence I saw, I was pretty sure that if there is a God, he’s definitely not the Christian one. The Bible has way too many flaws and confusing passages for it to be real. The Quran is even worse, but still just another religion with a bible… So I am pretty convinced and will further more live my life as an atheist and think like an atheist to make important decisions instead of the latter which sounds overly complicated. I am proud to be a thinker and am pretty happy with my decision to become a non religious person. Most people think that atheist are bad people, but it takes a certain level of brain power to not believe in God. So your atheists are more smart than mean. Atheist don’t believe in Satan either btw… So yea… Occam’s Razor is a perfect example for what I was arguing. The hypothesis with the least assumptions is usually right. And religion has a whole lot of assuming/faith…
PS: How can it be that the majority of the world will go to hell because they simply did not believe that God exists? And whats up with him being so evident in the world at the time of the bible, but pretty much non evident now?
Caleb,
I think you’re bringing a presumption that people get or are somehow all supposed to get equal treatment from God.
I’m not sure where you got that assumption. You didn’t get it from Judaism or Christianity. But yes, if you assume that then of course you would not believe in God. I don’t know of anything that could be more obvious than the fact that people all over the world are born into vastly different circumstances.
Please note that when you say what you think God would or wouldn’t do, you are making theological propositions. I think it’s interesting that people who call themselves atheists make up theological propositions and then based on those propositions decided not to believe in God. Either way you are engaged in theology. (And as far a Christianity is concerned, a straw man argument.)
The stuff I referred you to indicates how Jesus dealt with this question. He said people would be JUDGED by a fair standard. Not that everyone would have the same circumstances in their life.
Based on what Jesus taught, I am not nearly as concerned about the Buddhist village in Nepal who never heard about Jesus. I am much more concerned about people such as yourself who have unlimited access to knowledge. You will be held to a much, much higher standard. I do not recommending using the Buddhists in Nepal as an excuse for rejecting Jesus. Jesus is saying that at the judgment they will stand up and testify against you.
You say you have investigated. Maybe you have. Based on your Wikipedia link I’m not convinced. I’ve given you enough material to spend 2 solid days of investigation, if not 2 weeks – including peer reviewed scientific literature confirming the healing of blind and deaf people – and all I get is a quick retort and a link to Wikipedia. I assume you’re referring to all the quotes by skeptics – who, by the way, pretend volumes of documented evidence of those same miracles were never written.
Caleb, there is a LOT – I mean a LOT – of medical evidence for miracles.
I’m sorry but the tone of what you have posted so far does not sound like sincere investigation. I don’t mean to judge you and I hope I’m wrong about that.
I have been conversing with atheists for a very long time and I have found that while atheism derives great pleasure from going on the attack, atheists are notoriously bad at defending the things they themselves believe.
Why is there something instead of nothing? Where did the big bang come from? Where did life come from? Why is the universe profoundly orderly and mathematical? Why do the “gaps” of science grow wider with each passing year instead of narrower? Most atheists are not even well enough versed on these issues to recognize that atheism provides zero answers to these questions. My site http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com addresses these questions in excruciating detail. If you are the least bit scientifically minded I think you owe it to yourself to get more clear about these questions.
In regards to your PS, I think this statement by Jesus in John 15 is very, very interesting:
22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 Whoever hates me hates my Father as well. 24 If I had not done among them the works no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. As it is, they have seen, and yet they have hated both me and my Father. 25 But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: ‘They hated me without reason.’
The bolded portion speaks to the Buddhist in Nepal. Paul makes related statements in Romans 2:
12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
Again, Caleb, I am not so concerned about people who have not heard. God will judge them fairly and graciously. I’m concerned about those who have, and who have “hated Him without reason.”
Ok… alot of the paragraphs should have been addressed to Tim, since I didn’t ask about the Buddhist, etc…
But about the miracles. No, I wasn’t referring to the skeptics who supposedly ignore data of that magnitude… but to other religions of the world who have documented miracles too. (Are you saying that someone is concealing evidence though? Because that would be a matter on a whole other level…)
I am not your typical atheist though… I find evolution to have its flaws and don’t necessarily believe we evolved from apes. I believe in what makes the most sense… Something that religious kin laugh about but is the most plausible explanation. And that is aliens. Either they exist or they don’t. And the numbers say they do. So if they do, what levels of knowledge have they reached? Smart enough to get around the space/time barrier? Sure! Smart enough to clone or recreate every living thing on this earth from scratch? Sure! This would explain your DNA topic.
I don’t know the answers to all of the major questions about life, but there are scientific explanations for most of it if not all. I do know that scientist have recently all agreed that the big bang was not the beginning. Excellent video on BBC about it.
Mathematics is a universal language. 1 is still 1 on the other side of the universe. The universe is not really orderly either. Just our conditions in this solar system. We’ve only found a handful of other potential planets just like our own.
I could write a book on the reasons why aliens make more sense than God, but you’d probably ask where aliens come from. And I’d probably say that that is just as good of a question as where did God came from.
Why would God create such an immense universe only to populate one tiny planet out of trillions? The concept of life on other planets in no way conflicts with Christianity. Although, the concept of alien travel across the many hundreds to billions of light-years still escapes our own science. It might be possible but, in theory, such travel would require something, like opening wormholes and expending the amount of energy equivalent to exploding a star. But we’re only primitive humans and there might just be a way to do this, which we have not yet discovered.
Re: “the big bang was not the beginning”
The beginning of what? The beginning, as generally taught, involves space-time. But in the Kingdom, time is irrelevant.
God existed before the beginning and after the end. He is the Alpha and Omega; the one who was and is and will be.
Have you read the scriptures? The prophets sometimes speak of things that will be as if they had already been. Isaiah prophesied the coming, life, and death of Jesus Christ with amazing accuracy. But he did so by stating events as if they had already happened. How can that be? Why would he do that?
Before time existed, time was irrelevant and time will be irrelevant when it no longer exists. When there was no time, neither did death exist. Without time, there was no death; and without time, there will be no death. This is why time must end.
Now, as Christians, we believe that anything (that means *anything*) is possible through God. So, if it was God’s will that an alien civilization travel across the cosmos to seed planet Earth, then He could (and would) make that happen. However, why would God do that when He is omnipotent and could simply turn clay into a living thing directly on Earth? After all, God is the absolute master of quantum physics – He created all physics and science. We ignorant humans know very little of His science. If mankind survives long enough, he will someday prove, through science, that God does indeed exist.
Interesting questions.
I think you aren’t following the common concept of time… Time is the chronological order of events. And space time is just the concept that space and time are bound together. Einstein came up with that. So if there was no time, then thoughts could not happen. Time is defined. What happened before “time” is not. If God existed before time, then time is not the right word for that statement. There is nothing you can do that does not involve time. Including living forever.
And you are right about all of the things God “could” do. Isn’t it amazing that an all knowing powerful God would create the universe in a week, wait 8,000 years, and then divide the population to heaven or hell to live for eternity? Kind of a quick and sloppy plan for someone who is omnipotent.
Re: “Time is the chronological order of events.”
Once again, your superior intellect blows me away.
It seems that you are having difficulty with abstract concepts, in particular the concept of a multidimensional universe, or universes. How many dimensions have been theorized by brilliant minds? If you truly understood the things which you seem to be an expert in, you would already comprehend the irrelevance of time.
I find this discussion to be very entertaining. Thank you.
Sorry, I forgot to address your question: “divide the population to heaven or hell …?”
The population divides itself. Each makes their own choice to be with God, or to not. You have free will and are given a choice. You choose.
Re: “Kind of a quick and sloppy plan for someone who is omnipotent.”
This makes me laugh. Yet, I am saddened by the blasphemy and your apparent choice to be separated from your Creator who loves you. What have you ever done that could even come close to grandeur of even the smallest of living creatures? Who are you to judge God? Why don’t you try creating a universe and see how you feel when the most beloved part of your creation turns against you?
I believe that God created Heaven and Earth. But I think it might be a bit presumptuous to tell us what God did, why he did it, and how we should act because of all he has given. How do you really know? Stop using the Bible as the accurate truth to solve historical details. Instead use the Bible as a guide to live a good and a God filled life. God’s gift is love and to have Life and have it abundantly.
My superior intellect? Now thats funny… I’m not the smartest guy around, but I feel like I could be in the top 5 I know. You religious people have a bit of a handicap when it comes to branches of science that contradict your beliefs. So I also feel that I know more about it than you. So your comment kinda holds! I’d love to hear your explanation on how its possible to live forever in a spirit body with no time involved. Details please. No abstract stuff…
And I’m glad you picked my sarcastic comment to argue against… Of course people have free will! If not, they’d be robots! There also seems to be limited free will in heaven though… I mean, incapable of sinning? How does that work? Again, No abstract stuff..
I’m sorry, but you can call it blasphemy all you want. Technically, every argument I’ve posted on this site could be called blasphemy…Trust me, I’m way over it…
You like to say that I’ve turned my back on God or that I hate God and what not… Thats far from the truth. I do not believe in God. So there is no one for me to hate. Why do I not believe in God? Because my superior intelligent mine has not found a good enough reason to. You wonder how I can’t believe… I wonder how you do believe!
If there was the tiniest shred of concrete proof that God was real, there would not be any other religions nor atheist and we wouldn’t be having this debate. Buuuut…. Theres not. I’m truly open to anything that could change my mind, but I’m not banking on it.
So laugh all you want at my supposed mix of intelligence and mindlessness. I can and will debate anything you have to say. Logically.
Which is kind of unfair, since logic really isn’t a part of your arguments… We’ll never have a level playing field.)
And to Beverly…
When the “Word of God” paints a pretty vivid picture of him and his very human personality, I have a basis to make my assumptions by.
PS: I definitely do not use the Bible as accurate truth… I just use it to really prove my point against the ones who do. And man are there alot of things to argue about…
Caleb,
Atheists have a major handicap when it comes to branches of Truth that contradict their beliefs.
I have never accused you of hatred. Yes, most of what you have said in your posts has been blasphemy but I believe you can still be forgiven. Your blasphemy does not insult me but God. You lose in this, not me.
How to live forever? Well, we certainly can’t do it in a body that dies, decays, and turns to dust, can we? If I actually had the full answer on that, in undisputable mathematical and scientific terms, I probably wouldn’t be discussing this with you right now – at least not in this manner. You’ll have to be satisfied with abstractions and there are plenty of those to go around.
As far as proof, I’ve asked the same. What can God show me that will prove beyond all doubt? Well, it seems it won’t matter what He does. He has done plenty and you have more than sufficient evidence, already. Just look around you at the universe. Read the rest of this site. I’ve given you physical evidence, myself, and there are verifiable testimonies of many people.
We are not supposed to ask for signs. So, I will not ask that you are given a sign. That is up to God to grant such a grace. However, I will do this for you. I will simply pray that you are shown the Truth:
Father in Heaven, Caleb Culberson does not yet believe in you, nor in Your son, Jesus Christ, nor in your Holy Spirit. Let it be your will, Father, to open Caleb’s eyes and ears and show him the Truth about You so that he might believe, not just for himself, but for Your glory and for the salvation of others like him. Lord, save Caleb from the abyss and pull him from the clutches of the enemy which does not want Caleb to believe in God, nor even in itself. Save Caleb and he will be your witness, just as Apostle Paul was your witness. Lord, grant this not only in subtle ways but with shock and awe! I ask all brothers and sisters in Christ to pray the same for Caleb and for all others who do not believe. Copy this prayer and send it to your friends. Put this prayer on prayer chains, wherever you are. If enough people ask with sincerity, the Father will grant this request and Caleb, with others like him, although not yet knowing what it means to be free, they will be set free. Amen!
Caleb, remember those who have prayed for you when the time comes.
I appreciate the prayer. I really do. A sign would be something I’ve always wanted. But it still wouldnt answer all of my endless questions. Why would Gods “divine” 1-shot plan be so complicated? Why allow the evidence to persuade others he doesn’t exist? Why should I be punished for questioning something that needs questioning? If I actually stood before God, I’d ask him why he chose this scenario in his one-and-done ordeal. It just doesn’t make sense.
Caleb,
I hope you’ll permit me to suggest a somewhat different perspective.
First this is a great question, “Why should I be punished for questioning something that needs questioning?”
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with questioning things. I couldn’t possibly create a website like this one without being someone who questions everything myself.
What was Jesus really doing in the temple at age 12? Luke 2:
45 When they couldn’t find him, they went back to Jerusalem to search for him there. 46 Three days later they finally discovered him in the Temple, sitting among the religious teachers, listening to them and asking questions. 47 All who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers.
48 His parents didn’t know what to think. “Son,” his mother said to him, “why have you done this to us? Your father and I have been frantic, searching for you everywhere.”
49 “But why did you need to search?” he asked. “Didn’t you know that I must be in my Father’s house?” But they didn’t understand what he meant.
He was debating and questioning the rabbis. When he got older he argued with them fiercely. If you know anyone who’s Jewish you know they don’t take anything for granted.
I would suggest that there’s 2 kinds of questioning. There’s questioning for curiosity, and there’s questioning to be derisive. The former is humble, the latter is arrogant.
The proud, derisive sort of questioning is the hallmark of atheism. Which, by the way, is paired with outrageous gullibility for anything that appears to disprove religion.
I’ve seen some of the worst science imaginable in atheist books. A lot of it is just made up out of thin air. Origin of life theories for example – 90% pure fiction.
Maybe the best example of all is the oft-repeated argument that 97% of our DNA is junk. The junk dna theory is well on its way out, but it’s been the atheists who’ve propped it up for the last 30 years. It was held out as evidence for how ‘dumb’ God and belief in God is.
Why is God’s plan so complicated? Why is the world so complicated? I don’t know, but it is. So…. why would anyone consider complexity or the difficulty of a challenge to be evidence against God??? Wouldn’t that support the idea that God is vastly bigger than our puny minds?
“Why allow evidence to persuade others he doesn’t exist?”
Personally I think the evidence for order and structure in the universe is so unanimous that one is hard pressed to find actual evidence to the contrary. When atheists and skeptics see a disorderly chaotic world, they’re projecting their moral experience of humanity and its evil onto the physical world. They’re seeing what they want to see and nothing else.
The “random and purposeless” world of the atheist is simply his own inner narrative. It has little to do with reality. Randomness is not even provable in mathematics. To declare the universe as random is just a groundless assertion.
I would encourage you to ask yourself whether you’re seeing things as they really are.
Finally you should not expect this to be easy. Consider what Jesus said:
10 His disciples came and asked him, “Why do you use parables when you talk to the people?”
11 He replied, “You are permitted to understand the secrets of the Kingdom of Heaven, but others are not. 12 To those who listen to my teaching, more understanding will be given, and they will have an abundance of knowledge. But for those who are not listening, even what little understanding they have will be taken away from them. 13 That is why I use these parables,
For they look, but they don’t really see.
They hear, but they don’t really listen or understand.
14 This fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah that says,
‘When you hear what I say,
you will not understand.
When you see what I do,
you will not comprehend.
15 For the hearts of these people are hardened,
and their ears cannot hear,
and they have closed their eyes—
so their eyes cannot see,
and their ears cannot hear,
and their hearts cannot understand,
and they cannot turn to me
and let me heal them.’
16 “But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. 17 I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, but they didn’t see it. And they longed to hear what you hear, but they didn’t hear it.
Caleb,
You’re welcome but it is not a sign that is being asked for. The prayer request is that you are shown the Truth. Don’t expect a sign. Just expect the Truth.
So religious debates have been around forever. Big surprise. Everyone loves to argue. And those two types of questions are very different. A curious religious question usually means you don’t know the answer and are willing to accept whatever you are told if it makes sense to you. The other is asking a contradiction question that you don’t expect a real answer to.(Most questions are: “Why would God _____ if _____?) And I guess that may seem a little arrogant…
Like I said before. I am not your typical atheist. I have a hard time believing what they say about abiogenesis and such. I’m sure there is alot of bad science out there, but it will keep moving forward and continue to be criticized by other scientists until one day it will be nearly flawless.
“Why is God’s plan so complicated? Why is the world so complicated? I don’t know, but it is. So…. why would anyone consider complexity or the difficulty of a challenge to be evidence against God???”
Why wouldn’t anyone consider that? He’s God! He can do anything! The magnitude of knowledge needed to create space, time, matter, laws, and everything else needed to sustain our lives, is so great that the idea that he would create something sub-par is ridiculous. Do you really think that this was the best he could do? Whatever his intentions, he knew exactly what would take place in every possible aspect of time. So take your free-will and question why THIS is it? THIS is the legacy of God! He knew it would happen just this way.
The universe is not really too random… As Steven Hawking said “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”
And I’m sorry, but scripture does not apply as evidence to an argument against atheism. Only the other way around.
Oh, OK…. I get it now. You ask “Why would God…” question. Which is a theological question. When I give you a theological answer, your reply is that only atheist arguments count and theological ones don’t. And in the same breath tell me what you, as an atheist, know God would and would not do. A theological statement.
You’ve made it very clear that you’re willing to consider one side of the equation and not the other.
We’re done.
Nice try Perry, but you are getting my words all tangled up…again. My “Why would God…” questions are not at all theological. More like sarcastic. I argue against your logic with your logic. And yes. I do not believe in the Bible. So why would a quote from it hold water? And again, I do not claim to know what God would or wouldn’t do, I simply make assumptions based on his other attributes. What sense does it make to claim knowledge of the intentions of a being I don’t even believe in?
We’re far from done.
Hi Caleb.
Although you claim to be an atheist different from the others, there is something in the way you conduct your debate with Perry that is typical of many atheists.
Typically, atheists put very little on the table while enticing the believer to spill everything. Atheists claim that there is no God but make no effort to prove it. Generally, the atheist’s strategy is to put the burden of proof on the believer while shooting down all his attempts to do so. Meanwhile, the atheist puts nothing on the table leaving the believer with nothing to shoot at. It is very evident in your debate with Perry.
So Caleb, I would like to encourage you to state your major beliefs and give us a chance to interpellate you. Maybe that will be a more effective way of convincing you that the religion of atheism is not as reasonable as the Christian religion.
The Truth, A Sign. Same thing really. You are supposedly showing my the truth right now. So believable truth would have to be a sign…
“Why would Gods “divine” 1-shot plan be so complicated?”
Why not? God has made simple things and complicated things. God has made all sorts of things. There is variety in creation.
“Why allow the evidence to persuade others he doesn’t exist?”
Why not?
“Why should I be punished for questioning something that needs questioning?”
Are you really going to be punished for questioning? Who said? Maybe for other things but definitely not for that one.
Every choice we make has a consequence. Some call it reward and punishment. Others call it salvation and judgement. It’s the trend in child education to call it consequence, positive and negative.
That’s the design of the world that God created. You say that the design is flawed. By what standards or measure? You want your opinions to be the measure. That’s why I say atheism is a religion where the deities are the atheists themselves who delight in imposing their denuded ideas because of their jealousy of the one, true God.
“If I actually stood before God, I’d ask him why he chose this scenario in his one-and-done ordeal. It just doesn’t make sense.”
Making sense of something requires that one possesses the requisite notions for doing so. Calculus requires algebra. Reading requires letters and phonetics.
There are notions that are provided only by faith. Without faith, one is simply not equipped to make sense of certain things.
Jun…
“Why not?” is not an answer.
Because you are talking about influencing on where people will supposedly spend eternity. Thats why not…
And yes… the bible says not to question things.
So… you are saying that I make myself into a god because I am jealous of a god I don’t believe in???
Well said… I supposedly don’t have the higher levels of knowledge to know what I am talking about. I have to have “faith” to understand. To me, faith is believing in something that there is no proof for. And I refuse to make decisions based on such a thing.
I just wanted to share this. This is one of my favorite wiki pages. It provides arguments from all sides. I encourage you to read both sides. Just skip to the arguments part.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God
Many Christians like to say, wait until you die, then youll know the truth! But that same argument could be used against them by non christians as well. Its convenient to dismiss people that believe in other gods as atheists, because it makes it easier on christians to stereotype. But non christian does NOT mean atheist, and christians, will find out when they die. I have good friends that have met Anubis, Ra, Freyja and the old gods and goddesses, so, christians can throw their line of false gods all they like, its not convincing me.
Brianisha,
Re: “I have good friends that have met Anubis, Ra, Freyja and the old gods and goddesses”
I know some people like that, also. For instance, a close friend who was taoist. She believed in such false gods, as well. But after some very intense and frightening supernatural experiences, it was proven that those “deities” were nothing more than demons masquerading as “gods”. They are all ruled by satan. They will tell you whatever you want to hear. They can even make a person feel “loved” and “peaceful”, etc. If you want your personal desires fulfilled, satan will be happy to oblige. But only for a time.
There is only one true God and He will not tell you whatever you want to hear. Sometimes, the truth is inconvenient. This is why Jesus had more than 12 disciples but many abandoned Him and His teaching because the Truth was too inconvenient. The way of Truth is narrow and rocky but the path into the abyss is wide and easy. This is so very true. But when you reach the point where you are filled with joy by the true God, it is an experience far far beyond anything you could ever experience in any pagan religion.
You say you’re not convinced about false gods. Well, everyone must make a choice. But before you decide, be certain you do your research very carefully and be uncompromising in the truth. The evil one who wants you will do anything at all to convince you and claim you for itself. No matter how many people you drag into the abyss with you, that will never change the truth nor make you less accountable for the loss of the souls of those deceived and led astray.
I don’t pretend to waste time trying to convince those who have already made up their minds to reject the only one true God. I speak to those who have not yet made their choice. Choose wisely.
The more scandals, the more fights and killings in the name of Jesus, the more pointless this debate will become. Some part of me is wondering why Im here, the other part knows why. I was once lost (chistian) but now im found (Pagan). Knowledge is power, and that is something Christianity doesnt allow for. Too late, I already had a bite, the apple was tasty and showed me the truth behind the lies. Cant undo what I did. Neither do I regret it either.
Hi Caleb.
Although you claim to be an atheist different from the others, there is something in the way you conduct your debate with Perry that is typical of many atheists.
Typically, atheists put very little on the table while enticing the believer to spill everything. Atheists claim that there is no God but make no effort to prove it. Generally, the atheist’s strategy is to put the burden of proof on the believer while shooting down all his attempts to do so. Meanwhile, the atheist puts nothing on the table leaving the believer with nothing to shoot at. It is very evident in your debate with Perry.
The weird thing about atheists is that although we do behave like a religion we are not one. It just so happens that we think exactly alike. There is no bible to interpret, so we don’t have anything to divide for. You could call it a mass group of non-believers, but definitely not a religion.
I have nothing to put on the table. Proving something doesn’t exist is called an unrestricted negative. So you are right. “The burden of proof lies with the theist rather than the atheist.” -Bertrand Russell.
My beliefs are that every religion in the world is wrong and none have put up evidence to convince the scientist nor other religions of its superiority. Atheists exist because there is nothing logical to believe in.
Caleb,
Regarding: “none have put up evidence ”
That’s not true. You choose to pretend no-one has produced evidence because the truth is inconvenient for you.
No worries. You *will* be shown the truth.
You know… Perry said the same thing. That skeptics pretend that evidence doesn’t exist… For 1, I am a skeptic and I don’t remember discarding anything because it was “inconvenient”. And I highly doubt that the other atheists in the world are denying logical answers to the questions they’ve asked all of their lives. (Since most atheists grow out of their religion instead of being brought up as one) 2nd, Please get my quote right if you are going to use it. The tally marks for people misquoting or misrepresenting what I say on this page just keeps going up…
So again:
“none have put up evidence to convince the scientist nor other religions of its superiority.”
I’m sorry, but the above statement is true. Unless your conspiracy theory on how atheists ignore or hide evidence that could convince the nations takes flight…
Either way, I am unaware of this secret knowledge. Will you please explain it to me so I can go back 5 years and level the scale of my Christianity vs. Atheism dilemma? Yea… I’m only 23…
Right. My bad. I only quoted part of your sentence. Regardless, it still appears that the evidence, which has been presented, is inconvenient for atheists because no-one can disprove it. You don’t believe in the results of miracles. I’ve even provided a photo of angelic beings, etc. You, like all other atheists, ignore what you can’t disprove and pretend it doesn’t exist. Where is your proof that the evidence is not real? Oh, right. You asked for proof of superiority. Always an out for you guys, huh? Well, why should we have to prove anything at all? You’re the one asking questions. It’s up to you to accept or reject the answers given. We have nothing to prove to anyone but God.
As I said, you will be shown the truth. It just might not be in a way you would prefer. My mistake is not taking cue from Perry. He said this discussion is over. So it is.
God Bless.
It’s an odd angle you have taken, arguing that athiests are deliberately ignoring evidence and iterpreting things to suit there own agenda. I think most athiests and agnostics would be quite happy to find out they were wrong, and that there is, afterall, ever lasting life in a a paradise somewhere. So if there is evidence that supports that then i would genuinely be delighted. You mentioned a “photo of angelic beings” that you have provided. i would be really interested in seeing it, can I?
Definitely an odd angle.
There you go with the denial jazz again… I guess I’m just a block head huh? Too smart for my own good or something… lol I am an atheist because I have a mound of reasons to be. I don’t ride the fence on anything! So you accusing me and every other atheist of (somehow…) not believing in god, but still having the discarded “proof” in the back of our heads, is ridiculous!
“Well, why should we have to prove anything at all?” Because it seems that God is not obvious to anyone but Christians…
“My mistake is not taking cue from Perry.” You may be right… because I had a hard time deciphering your last post…
And just so you know… having the last post is nothing new to me. Everyone I’ve debated about Christianity gives up just like you and Perry. I’m actually surprised it lasted this long! I have the knowledge and the know-how to keep debating logically and address whatever you have to say. You guys, on the other hand, reply to about 10% of what I say and ignore most of my good points. So who’s really in denial here?
If this is in fact your last post, I’d still like to thank you for the challenge. But if this was the best you’ve got, then I know I’ll forever be an atheist… Its not entirely your fault though. You just never quite stumped me…
“There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, and science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win the battle with religion because it works.” -Stephen Hawking
“I have nothing to put on the table. Proving something doesn’t exist is called an unrestricted negative. So you are right. “The burden of proof lies with the theist rather than the atheist.” -Bertrand Russell.”
You have successfully given a name to the atheists’ failure to prove their assertions about God’s existence but that doesn’t mean that it’s a justification for dodging the burden to prove them.
“My beliefs are that every religion in the world is wrong and none have put up evidence to convince the scientist nor other religions of its superiority. Atheists exist because there is nothing logical to believe in.”
Thanks for honestly and bravely admitting that your basis for your belief that every religion in the world is wrong is a philosophical attitude called logical positivism.
Logical positivism is valid within a certain range of validity but stretched beyond that range,it becomes absurd.
There are many things that can be accepted as true even without proof simply because 1.) they seem reasonable and 2.) there is no strong reason to disbelieve them plus 3.) not accepting them as true leads to all sort of unacceptable conclusions.
For example, believing that God exists seems reasonable (1) because it allows one to explain the existence of things. (2) Nobody can prove that God does not exist.(3) Assuming that God does not exist leads me to conclude that there is no right and wrong and no good and evil, that they are just empty words. But if that is the case, then any body can steal from me and that would be okay. Anybody can kill me and that will be okay. We can all lie to each other and that will be okay. But it’s not okay! So I work it out backwards and conclude that God must exist.
Do the preceding statements constitute a proof for the existence of God? I don’t think so. But they constitute a reason for me to believe that God exists. They supply me with a motive to believe that God exists. And unless one day somebody comes along showing an incontrovertible proof that God does not exist, there is no reason for me to change my mind.
“You have successfully given a name to the atheists’ failure to prove their assertions about God’s existence…”
I didn’t give this name, and its certainly not a failure. Atheist cannot and will never be able to prove that God does not exist. BECAUSE, it is impossible to PROVE that something does not exist. -unrestricted negative.
The only proof one can make is by taking what information you have. (The Bible) And making educated guesses on its validity. It can go both ways here. You see tons of proof that he exist. I see tons that he doesn’t. Since the Bible is the only reference you have, I’d go in the favor of him not existing… The God from the Bible doesn’t seem fitting for the “God” title. And please stop saying that its above my knowledge barrier…
Yes. Logical positivism. Or Logical empiricism. Stating that scientific knowledge is the only factual knowledge. That does sound like me… But I don’t see how you could stretch it beyond its range. Or how it could be absurd.
Whats absurd is your 123 scheme…
1.Wrong! Atheism explains the existence of things perfectly.
2.Right! No one can prove that God doesn’t exist. But as an atheist, I have no strong reason to believe in a god.
3. Wow, that really sums it up… unacceptable conclusions… What the bible is full of… And who says that good and evil needs god to exist? They kinda fall into a universal constant sort of thing. Where 1 is 1 everywhere. Light and dark… high and low… hot and cold… fast and slow… loud and quite… positive and negative… good and bad(evil). Good and evil is a bit of a concept only humans have though. Killing, stealing, and deceit happens in the wild. But they aren’t regarded as sins or evil.
In conclusion… You’ll never have proof God doesn’t exist. Only good reason. Since you already ignore these reasons, it’ll probably take something big to change your mind. Like aliens or something… And if you say you don’t believe in aliens, then try to prove they don’t exist. You can’t. Only reasons for their existence exist.
“The only proof one can make is by taking what information you have. (The Bible) And making educated guesses on its validity. It can go both ways here. You see tons of proof that he exist. I see tons that he doesn’t. Since the Bible is the only reference you have, I’d go in the favor of him not existing…”
I wonder if this is a comment on my comments. If you will try to revisit my comments, you will see that I have never tried to justify God’s existence by referring to the Bible. Six years before I came across a copy of the Bible, I already believed in the existence of God.
” “Why not?” is not an answer. ”
Maybe, “Why would Gods “divine” 1-shot plan be so complicated?” is not a valid question or concern.
You never questioned why the design of the human body is very complicated if indeed God designed it.
You never questioned why the whole of creation is so complicated if indeed it was designed and created by God.
Why are you asking why God’s plan is so complicated when it comes to the economy of salvation?
You never tried to justify why it shouldn’t be.
“Because you are talking about influencing on where people will supposedly spend eternity. Thats why not…”
Not good enough.
“And yes… the bible says not to question things.”
Where? Can you be more specific? It is possible that you have misunderstood.
“So… you are saying that I make myself into a god because I am jealous of a god I don’t believe in???”
I was saying that atheists act like gods because they claim something and expect people to accept them even without any effort to justify it.
Well said… I supposedly don’t have the higher levels of knowledge to know what I am talking about. I have to have “faith” to understand. To me, faith is believing in something that there is no proof for.
Faith is also believing something on the authority of somebody else. And I got the impression that you have faith in what Bertrand Russel when you quoted him.
“And I refuse to make decisions based on such a thing.”
And yet you accept that you cannot prove the non-existence of something even if you cannot prove it.
Hi Caleb. Please see below two statements of yours that I have cut and pasted.
Caleb Culberson: 2.Right! No one can prove that God doesn’t exist.
Caleb Culberson: “To me, faith is believing in something that there is no proof for. And I refuse to make decisions based on such a thing.”
First, you stated that there is no proof that God doesn’t exist. Second, you stated, in effect, that accepting that God does not exist is an act of faith and that you cannot make decisions based on that. How can this be true? You’re an atheist. You’re supposed to make decisions based on the faith that God does not exist.
That’s what I have been trying to lead you to: To demonstrate to yourself that atheism entails contradictions.
Atheists rejects the existence of God because they reject faith and yet they cannot uphold the non-existence of God without faith.
11 posts Jun? Really? I could sum it all up in 1, but I guess I’ll just reply to them all…
“Maybe” the only thing invalid about that question is the reference to God. I could question the complexity of the human body and the universe as a whole though. Good eye. I didn’t… Why ask only about the salvation? I’d say its probably the most important reason to not complicate things. Why make things harder on people if they are easily persuaded anyway? “Not good enough.”? Get out of here…
About the questioning/doubting…
James:
5If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
7For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
8A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
This is just one part where questioning without believing is not held too highly…
“I was saying that atheists act like gods because they claim something and expect people to accept them even without any effort to justify it.”
Atheists act like gods because they don’t believe in gods and try to get others to do the same…without reason… Riiiight… That makes perfect sense. Its just as funny reading it literally too though… saying atheists act like gods- because of false claims… Gods do that!? Which Gods? lol
“And yet you accept that you cannot prove the non-existence of something even if you cannot prove it.”
As confusing as that sounds, yes. I accept that I cannot prove that god does not exist. Even if I cannot prove that I cannot prove that he doesn’t.
I feel like we are going in circles here…
“About the questioning/doubting…”
So by questioning you actually meant doubting God.
You should have been more specific. There is questioning that grows from doubt. There is questioning that arises from a sense of wonder.
Questioning or doubting the wisdom of God,admittedly offends God. Questioning that seeks to see more truth and to understand better is definitely meritorious.
Hi Caleb.
If only you will try to clarify the meaning of sin and evil, stealing and deceit, you will soon find out that you were not making any sense, when you said, “Killing, stealing, and deceit happens in the wild. But they aren’t regarded as sins or evil.”
“I feel like we are going in circles here…”
You are going in circles because you have committed the logical fallacy of circular reasoning.
“atheists act like gods- because of false claims… Gods do that!? Which Gods?”
You are guilty of the very things you accuse me of but cannot prove: putting words in my mouth.
Atheists act like gods not because they make false claims (that’s not what I said. If you believe that that’s what I said, please show me) but because they make claims without justification and expect people to just accept them.
I was joking just a bit… but again, How is this acting like a god? A false god you mean? Which is totally weird concept… I mean, how can someone knowingly worship a false god? (lol) And why does the bible say not to have any gods before him? There aren’t any others right? Maybe he meant false gods too… But that’d be no contest!
Like I said in my previous post, No one TRULY acts as if their god is real. And they show no real lifestyle changes after claiming to have talked to him/her/it… And why would people continue to sin in the bible if they KNEW god was real… It makes no sense…
“I was joking just a bit… but again, How is this acting like a god? A false god you mean? Which is totally weird concept… I mean, how can someone knowingly worship a false god? (lol) And why does the bible say not to have any gods before him? There aren’t any others right? Maybe he meant false gods too…”
You’re confused. It’s so hard to comment on a confused statement.
“No one TRULY acts as if their god is real. ”
Wow. It’s like you have met everyone. Congratulations!
“And why would people continue to sin in the bible if they KNEW god was real… It makes no sense…”
Because people have a real option to choose something other than God himself. Choosing God is not automatic.
But still why? Because people can forget the true value of God. Their appetites can be attracted by forces which at times is stronger than the force of attraction to the value of God.
Why? Because people are not always in the contemplative mode. Their activities require them to turn their gaze away from God many times during the day for long periods of time. We have powers that draw us to fellow creatures. Powers that need the guidance of the intellect aided by faith.
Even now it’s easy to sin when living conditions are much better than in biblical times. I can imagine how life must have been a lot harsher and more challenging in biblical times. A virtuous life must have been a real rarity then.
As a believer, I believe in the wrongness of lying. In my prayer this morning, I asked the Lord to enlighten me on this matter. Is the prohibition on lying an absolute i.e. without exceptions? Or are there specific instances when it is justified?
I cited that personal situation to illustrate that believers have to struggle with many things in their relationship with God(=religion). When an outsider is looking at a believer and is judging his every move, it is very easy for him to find a cause of discouragement: discrepancy between the believer’s choices, actions, lifestyle, speech, etc and the declared beliefs of that person.
On a lighter note, Simon Cowell (of American Idol fame)has revealed that he regretted firing a person whom he said was not given enough chance. Before he fired her, he felt so sure that she deserved to be fired. Not anymore. I don’t know if Simon Cowell is Christian but the point is that people are constantly struggling to make the right decision. We are constantly under pressure to make decisions even when we are not ready to make them. As result, lots of opportunities for stumbling.
I can almost anticipate your question: Then why is salvation so difficult if God is real? But I’ll just wait for you to actually ask. You might not ask at all.
“1.Wrong! Atheism explains the existence of things perfectly.”
If you believe that (faith),that’s fine.
lol Science is far from faith..
“Science is far from faith..”
Science is founded on the faith that our senses and our mind can be trusted. Science cannot prove that our senses and our mind can be trusted. Science simply takes it for granted. Only radical skepticism is not founded on faith at least in theory: I am not sure about anything. But in practice, even skeptics have to have some faith to be able to function at all.
“Right! No one can prove that God doesn’t exist. But as an atheist, I have no strong reason to believe in a god.”
Good enough. At least, there is one less atheist who can claim that atheism is scientific.
Huh? Read above…
“Wow, that really sums it up… unacceptable conclusions… What the bible is full of… And who says that good and evil needs god to exist? They kinda fall into a universal constant sort of thing. Where 1 is 1 everywhere. Light and dark… high and low… hot and cold… fast and slow… loud and quite… positive and negative… good and bad(evil).”
How can you say that? What does ‘good’ mean and what does ‘evil’ mean?
“Good and evil is a bit of a concept only humans have though. ”
Is that a scientific statement? How do you know that animals even have concepts?
“Killing, stealing, and deceit happens in the wild. But they aren’t regarded as sins or evil.”
Regarded by whom?
I’m sure we have 2 different views on what is good and bad/evil. For 1, I don’t believe in “evil” or “sin”, so everything on the negative end is just “bad”. And they are just 2 words to describe the characteristics of something on a scale.
Scientific statement? No… I really didn’t even bother to read up on it. “How do you know that animals even have concepts?” I’d say it’d be foolish to think there are no concepts in an animals life, but I don’t think animals know good from bad.
Regarded by whomever!
“BECAUSE, it is impossible to PROVE that something does not exist.”
How can you prove that the statement above is correct?
Do that first before you use the statement to parry my arguments.
Just because some atheistic philosopher said that doesn’t prove it.
“BECAUSE, it is impossible to PROVE that something does not exist.”
If that is so, how do you know that that is so?
I’ll see if I can break it down for you…
An “unrestricted negative” is a claim to the effect that something doesn’t exist anywhere. Since no one can exhaustively examine every place in the universe, the reply goes, no one can conclusively establish the non-existence of anything.
– http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/schick_21_1.html (I’d invite you to read the top 5 paragraphs.)
“You see tons of proof that he exist. I see tons that he doesn’t.”
Let’s start talking about the tons of proofs that you have that God does not exist. Are you willing to put them to a test with me?
Hi Caleb. Below are two statements by you, contradicting each other.
Caleb Culberson: “Right! No one can prove that God doesn’t exist. ”
Caleb Culberson:“You see tons of proof that he exist. I see tons that he doesn’t.”
How can you see proofs that God doesn’t exist when you yourself say that no one can prove that God doesn’t exist?
When an atheist is permitted to be just a spectator/nitpicker, that gives him the chance to create the illusion that his convictions are more scientific/logical than and superior to those of a believer.
But when pressed to make assertions, atheists begin to reveal the poverty/absurdity/incoherence of their
convictions.
Don’t go crazy now thinking that you got me… lol
You’ve simply just took it out of context. Replace “proof” with “reasons” and look again.
Ps: You don’t see “proof” either…
Also… “…atheists begin to reveal the poverty/absurdity/incoherence of their
convictions.” -disregarded.
Hi Caleb.
Don’t fault me for the “tons of proof” remark. It’s from you. You’ll find it in your comment dated, June 29, 2011 at 2:30 pm. I simply copied and pasted it. You can also use the “find” function of your browser to locate that statement. Find “tons of proof” and you’ll see that that’s what you said. Not “tons of reasons.” There is no “tons of reason” in any of your comments.
Jun… Look two posts up. I just explained that to you… You can’t take “proof” literally. Replace it with “reasons” and you’ll see what I meant.
“Ps: You don’t see “proof”(God exists) either. Just reasons.
“Ps: You don’t see “proof” either…”
You’re contradicting yourself again. You’re the one who said in your post dated, June 29, 2011 at 2:30 pm, ” You (Me, Jun Mahusay) see tons of proof …”
“And who says that good and evil needs god to exist? They kinda fall into a universal constant sort of thing. Where 1 is 1 everywhere. Light and dark… high and low… hot and cold… fast and slow… loud and quite… positive and negative… good and bad(evil).”
Caleb, that was a real philosophical effort on your part. I salute you for that. For a moment, you tried to get out of the standard mold of a typical atheist: Making big claims without any effort to justify them.
My reaction.
You’re supposed to be trying to justify the existence of good and evil even without God.
Before you proceed to do that, it would be best to define your terminology. What do you mean by ’good’ and ‘evil?’
To establish that the existence of ‘good and evil’ does not require the existence of God, you enumerated a series of realities (pairs) whose existence are not in question and included ‘good and evil’ as the last part of the series., implying that if ‘good and evil’ is part of the series, then ‘good and evil’ can exist without God. You probably did not realize but it seems like a magic trick at a glance because
1. You never justified beforehand that the members of the series (other than ‘good and evil’ ) can exist even without God.
2. Even if I grant that the series is composed of members (other than ‘good and evil’) which can exist without God, you have not justified why ‘good and evil’ should be part of the series. Did you deliberately overlook that we’re still debating whether ‘good and evil’ can exist without God?
In short, your argument is suffering, it seems to me, from two kinds of logical fallacies: complex question (2) and circular reasoning (1), both falling under the more general category of presumption.
An argument is circular if it assumes (explicitly or otherwise) what it is trying to prove.
A complex question is an argument that assumes something to be true even though the assumption is not necessarily true.
Please see links below for a definition of complex question and circular reasoning:
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/begging-the-question/
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/complex.html
“Good and evil is a bit of a concept only humans have though. Killing, stealing, and deceit happens in the wild.”
In another comment of mine on this comment, I assumed that the killing, stealing and deceit are being perpetrated by animals in the wild. Could you elaborate on this killing, stealing and deceit taking place in the wild.?
“But they aren’t regarded as sins or evil”
Christians distinguish between the notions of evil and sin. ‘Evil’ is broader in scope than ‘sin.’ Sin refers to disobeying God. Since God commands doing good and avoiding evil, ‘sin’ refers therefore, to refusal or failure to do the good which God commands and to doing the evil which God forbids. ‘Sin’ therefore refers only to human acts. Whereas good and evil apply to the state of things and acts.
Are we back at this again? Its really tiring trying to answer the same questions different ways…
The things I listed fall into a scale. Just about the same way good and bad falls into a scale. The scale is self explanatory, but where you would put what where is totally in the eye of the beholder. The Bible gives the basics on what is definitely bad, but with times changing like they do, some things have become acceptable. 100 years from now though, things will be even more laid back… I’m sure you wonder how the world could even handle good and bad without God? Its pretty easy… Negative actions lead to negative consequences. Positive actions lead to positive consequences. We take what is productive and continue to build with it and take whats not and discard it.(Prisons)
How good and bad can exist without god is definitely a subject I haven’t put much thought into. Its kinda like one of those “it just does” situations. Either way, its highly unlikely that you’ll change my mind or beliefs on this particular subject, so I’ll just save my time…
Why should I elaborate? Do you not know that killing, stealing, and deceit happen in the wild? The first 2 at least right? (There is a type of male fish who pretends to be a female so that it can sneak to the where a female is being guarded by another male. It all works out until the male tries to mate with the sneak…)
Anyway, I’m done… This has become more of a job than a challenge… :/
Hi Caleb.
As I have said in another post, I am not trying to prove anyone wrong including you. What I am trying to do is to make you consider the possibility that you are wrong and to get you to keep on digging for the truth while keeping an open mind. Atheists love to claim that they are open-minded and the believers to be very dogmatic. I think in our discussion I have been able to demonstrate that atheistic dogma is very much a part of your thinking.
I have been able to get you to admit that you cannot prove that God does not exist. This basically means that as far as you are concerned, you must at least be open to the possibility that God does exist. Closing your mind to the possibility is definitely a kind of dogmatism.
I am grateful that you even allowed me to have this exchange with you. I am quite sure that in the future I will be able to look back and say, “Caleb helped me to realize this.”
We are all journeying towards the truth but because we all have different points of origin, routes, speed of travel and start times we are at any given time at different mid-points. So that when we are asked, “What is the truth?,” we all give different answers. We are all just describing the mid-points and not the destination (truth). One day we will meet again. Then we will all be rejoicing at finding each other again and at having found the truth, at last.
I do not in the least bit feel like I am wrong… I do keep digging for the truth, but only in the direction that makes more sense. I would def say that atheists are open minded. Because technically, they have nothing to believe in and would love to learn that there is a system behind everything. Christians on the other hand, are not so open minded and don’t consider the possibility that they are wrong. This makes debating pointless and tiring.
“I have been able to get you to admit that you cannot prove that God does not exist.” Actually I did that myself in 2 words… “unrestricted negative” This doesn’t mean that I am open to the existence of God. If I were, it’d be saying: God may exist, but he’s def not around to prove it. I don’t believe God exists at all! Because if he did, everything that you’ve read about him must be true 100%. And I just can’t accept that…
I would like to say though… I really doubt God exists simply because of the way Christians act. If God actually talked to me, and I had something so firm to believe in, you can guarantee that I’d be a completely different different person. Look at every religion that claims to talk to a God… Does their lifestyles change minimally or drastically? Exactly…
“An “unrestricted negative” is a claim to the effect that something doesn’t exist anywhere. Since no one can exhaustively examine every place in the universe, the reply goes, no one can conclusively establish the non-existence of anything.”
This means that an “unrestricted negative” as a claim may be wrong after all and it requires faith to maintain or adhere to it.
“This doesn’t mean that I am open to the existence of God. ”
That’s why I say you are more dogmatic than believers. If you can’t prove that God does not exist then you can’t be sure. Then you must be open to the possibility. But you are not. You are dogmatic. That’s not scientific.
“If I were, it’d be saying: God may exist, but he’s def not around to prove it.”
Non sequitur. It doesn’t follow.
Better: If I were, it’d be saying: God may exist, but I just can’t prove nor disprove it.
“I don’t believe God exists at all! ”
Fine. Just be open to the possibility that you are wrong. But since you said that you are only 23, I can understand why you are hard-headed.
“Because if he did, everything that you’ve read about him must be true 100%.”
Non sequitur. It doesn’t follow. Where did you get that logic?
“And I just can’t accept that…”
And you’re perfectly right.
“I would like to say though… I really doubt God exists simply because of the way Christians act.”
If you had said, ” I have a hard time becoming a Christian because of the way Christians act,” that would have been perfectly alright. But I simply can’t see how the un-Christian life of some Christians demonstrate that God does not exist.
“If God actually talked to me, and I had something so firm to believe in, you can guarantee that I’d be a completely different different person. Look at every religion that claims to talk to a God… Does their lifestyles change minimally or drastically? ”
The existence of God is supposed to be an objective fact. While life choices are subjective. Individual responses are subjective. There is always a disconnect between the objective and the subjective. Although, effort must be made to align the subjective to the objective.
We have a mother (objective).
I was always a dutiful son. Always tried to do things well. Never grumbled. Never rebelled (subjective, individual response).
My younger brother spent more time with friends. Never helped in the house chores. Grumbled about my mom. Usually home late. Spent very little studying (subjective, individual response).
My youngest brother spent most of his dancing in the street with friends. Did not do any homework. Took up drinking and smoking very early (subjective individual response).
How does the behavior of my two brothers prove that my mother doesn’t exist? It can be admitted, though, that if one looked at my two brothers’s lifestyles as teeners, one might be led to believe that they had no mother, that they were not raised properly by a mother. But I know it’s not true.