There's a lot of historic evidence if you do some research: about 20 sites noted in the Bible have been excavated and confirmed in archeological digs, along with documentation from non-biblical resources from Greek and Roman historians of Jesus' existence. Just do some searching (they're too long to list here), but it's there.
I don't deny at all people of other religions may very much believe in their faith. What I've said is, throughout numerous debates, is that I've done my homework from the time I was an atheist, studied the world religions and what other religions are missing is consistency in creation and faith and reason. I have not found this to be so with Christianity.
That is an excellent question about the Native Americans. I am part Indian. As I said, God reveals himself to all in numerous ways. The Bible says "all have sinned" (Rom 3:23). Native Americans were involved in sinful practices long before the white man came along, as was the white man long before coming to America. Furthermore, Native culture is loaded with occult beliefs and practices, including the worship of rocks, trees and sky and of the spirits that allegedly live in these things: worship of the creation instead of the Creator. And if they could worship these things, they could have worshipped Him in faith. And many have and do today. But don't misunderstand: God needs to open our spirit to be able to respond to the gospel. There won't be a single person eternally separated from God ("damned") who can say "I really wanted to be saved but wasn't given the chance". God is an all-knowing, loving and just God. Visit www.h-net.org/~west/threads/
There are saved Protestants and unsaved Protestants, saved Catholics and unsaved Catholics, saved Baptists and unsaved Baptists, etc. (see above). All basically adhere to the Nicene Creed and respect and love one another. If a Christian's faith in God through the Nicene Creed's basic tenants is genuine, then they will see the face of God. If, according to the Bible, people add to the Bible or attempt to rewrite it or redefine its fundamental principles (of which most of the Christian denominations do agree on), then they do not actually believe in the God of the Bible—then they have created their own god (idolatry).
One (just one) of Christianity's goals is to make people like Christ, who was, by all recorded accounts, the most moral person that ever walked the planet. However, as I've pointed out a number of times, man is fallen, and there is evil in the world. Christians are just as susceptible to it as non-believers. Please, please don't write off Christianity because of hate groups like the KuKluxKlan or Fred Phelps group—neither of whom understand the Gospel as displayed by their fruits. Writing authentic Christianity off because of horrible actions by groups like those is like saying some white men have murdered people, therefore all white men are murderers, or some black men robbed a grocery store, therefore all blacks are thieves. Which is obviously illogical and untrue. Those kinds of groups do not represent me or most Christians.
I'm sorry you think my view of the world is simplistic. I don't condemn atheists—I once was one, but I was apparently drawn by the Spirit and realized that atheism was even more simplistic and without proof, and I am entitled to my beliefs as much as you are.
I have answered your questions, but I'm pulling out for good. I got hurt last night by all the hateful responses, and God doesn't want that. He doesn't want me to be hurt or to hurt others in response—some of my reactions, no matter what the provocation, weren't cool. I came to this site because I accidentally came across it one day and noticed many questions on God with replies that revealed many had been misinformed or incorrectly taught about Christianity. I've tried to directly answer the question of a debate as fairly and respectfully as I could, but it's become apparent that this site is more interested in hateful cyber-bullying rather than a respectful exchange of thoughts or follow the rules of fair debate. And if atheists read this and it makes them feel good about themselves to do that to someone or feel no shame, then I believe I've proved not only my point for leaving but for the need for God. But I encourage all the atheists on this site to keep asking questions (there's a reason "Doubting" Thomas was one of the twelve apostles!), but I would also advise listening and hearing others out with respect. And if you TRULY want to know about God, it's always best to go directly to the source. Peace.
I must remember that I'm arguing with children. Sorry if it's difficult for you to understand. Making fun of black people is wrong. Is that clear enough for you? Most Americans take great offense at that. Clear enough? Some of us were taught to respect our presidents and elders—clearly your parents haven't gotten to that yet. If I can be of any more help in your upbringing, HGrey, Vanguard of Immaturity, just let me know! :)
I must remember that I'm arguing with children. Sorry if it's difficult for you to understand. Making fun of black people is wrong. Is that clear enough for you? Most Americans take great offense at that. Clear enough? Some of us were taught to respect our presidents and elders—clearly your parents haven't gotten to that yet. If I can be of any more help in your upbringing, HGrey, Vanguard of Immaturity, just let me know! :)
Because, in accordance with your very own words in your other rebuttal, if someone believes in a fairy tale, they're nuts, right? They're not worth treating with respect. SO—if Jesus not only believes in God, but believes He IS God, well, he'd be the king of the schizophrenics—why would anyone say, "Yeh, he's pretty great, but he's not God."????? You either believe all of it, or none of it.
Again,
“Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”
I needed to be reminded of this.
Wow, 1/3 of the world is schizophrenic, and you're a sociopath with no conscience? Nah. You don't want to believe, fine. I was answering someone else's debate question with my viewpoint as a believer.
Again...
“Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”
Must, must get this through my head. Thanks for the reminder!
Hey "Hostile"—How's it going? Very well, I hope.
You're absolutely right on your first point. You can't believe in God "just in case"... He won't be mocked or fooled.
Gosh, I'd hate to worship a flying spaghetti monster, wouldn't you? All that sauce... Oye. Your faith in God wouldn't be wrong, believe me. The Holy Bible is not based on evidence but is backed by evidence, and is an historic book of eyewitness testimonies and fulfilled prophecies and is based on reason. Hinduism and Buddhism, are based on an experiential enjoyment or satisfaction with the text or gods they offer. They do not point to a consistent creator or faith. This is why faith in Egyptian and Mayan gods passed away. Islam took its text from the Bible, said "Jesus is great, but He's not God" (an illogical argument), "we like Mohammed better" and altered it to suit themselves, something strictly forbidden by the very Bible they took from? Therefore, Mohammed was a false prophet. And Judaism is where Christianity stems from—the two are forever tied to one another.
How can one be truly good and deny the creator of his very life? How can God be selfish if He gave you life? Selfishness to me, seems to be the one who lacks respect or gratitude to the one who gives him everything. Would your mother be considered self-centered if you disowned her and wouldn't acknowledge her existence but still had the audacity to want to use her house?
God makes Himself known to all—through eyewitness testimony, His word (which has been distributed to just about every tribe, nation, and culture in the world through missionaries for just this purpose), through revelation, through testimony, and through dreams and visions and miracles... All will be shown a way to Him.
If one believes in Him, and is an "_sshole"—then that person either needs to get help from a pastor or psychologist, or ask his/herself if he/she TRULY believes. If one wants to, they can repent. If one prefers being an "_sshole," then that person has made his/her choice.
Believing in God does help you follow "the rules" better if one is actually following Christ's example, but people do fall short, and all men, not just unbelievers, are guilty of sinning.
There is. And every knee will bow before Him for judgment. Those who believe in Him will be judged differently than those who don't. When I pray to God, He in fact sees Jesus Christ standing in for me. He will see Jesus' blood. Jesus will then judge my deeds in terms of rewards after I pass—some shall receive many rewards, some shall receive fewer, but all will be saved. Unbelievers, if persistent in their unbelief and unrepentant, will not see God. That is their final judgment. It's funny that atheists claim this as punishment (which is how I, a believer, do see it), but for the atheist, this is exactly what they want—they don't want or have any need of a "God," so why would they care if they're eternally separated from Him (which is what Hell actually is)? God gives them what they want.
Plus a note: What is "good" to mankind is not the same as what is "good" to God. He's so good and so loving and so pure and so wise and so powerful, our best efforts at even trying to attain these things are "but filthy rags to Him." The only way He can look upon us is if He sees His son in our place, since His son is, was, and will always be, not just good, but perfection. Non-believers can do "good" or "nice" things—this does not make them unspoiled, perfect, obedient, or ample in true goodness. And, as I've said, believers, too, can be nice and charitable and whatnot, but without a genuine faith in Christ, this does not make them good.
Well, first, to answer your question: Yes, believing in God is worth it. But you must know, that faith in God does not mean that you are perfect, or that you will be considered "good" by people (in fact, many will despise you and call you intolerant out of their intolerance), or that your life will somehow be void of suffering or the traps of sin and temptations of life. It's not easy sometimes, but is most definitely worth it.
The benefits are: You are adopted into the family of God and our now considered His child. How awesome is that?! It's one thing to have cool parents on earth or wealth or great friends—but these shall all pass away or come and go. He—GOD (think about that)—will always be with me and for me, no matter what trials I go through in this life! Secondly, by accepting His son as our Savior we are instilled with the Holy Spirit, which then guides us when we don't know what to do, convicts us when we're wrong so we will know truth from lies, and transforms us to be the kind of person we all really want to be but could never seem to do or be on our own, like His son, Jesus. But you can't believe "just in case" or "even if there is no God"—that would actually be unbelief, besides God won't be fooled or mocked. One must truly believe in Him to receive the benefits. Oh and I forgot a biggie: we get to live eternally with Him and Jesus and all the other saints in Heaven after we pass!
Wrong. It's not funny. You are a racist and a coward. And if you truly had any intelligence, you would come up with more intelligent debates. And about your cussing in another debate, that only reveals your ignorance as well. Can't you come up with other words that will express your opinion, your feelings, your thoughts, whatever, in a more intelligent way? When you cuss just for the sake of cussing, or make racist, not to mention dumb, jokes it makes you sound uneducated, juvenile and commonplace. If that's the impression you're trying to make, you're succeeding. But if you'd like to present yourself as a strong, intelligent and confident person, then show some respect, because you're way out of line.
To respond to your first point: Your argument actually proves God's point where Jesus says there is "only way to come to the Father, and that is through the person of Jesus Christ"—not Mohammed, and that those in positions of power and authority will be judged more harshly, so that may be what's going on over there? That's not saying that there aren't peaceful and loving Muslims—it's saying that a nation is being ran via Islam by it's governing powers, which, according to Scripture, brings ruin upon itself by dismissing the person and holiness of Jesus and teaching their entire people to dismiss it as well. I personally believe that a nation of authentic believers in Christ running the country would be just and free of crime, pain, suffering, etcetera—oh wait, that would be Heaven. But sin is in the world and a country based on Christ's truth and faith and peace (not religion?) isn't going to happen here on earth. So we do the best we can with a democracy that guarantees protection of religion.
Your second point: I know for a fact that some people DO choose to "be gay" as one of my friends is newly gay, but didn't used to be, but after one too many hurts by the opposite sex and a desperate need to be cared for decided to give the other side a try. (And it should be noted that we hear each other's views on the subject with respect and agree to disagree but are still good friends.) There's also the perfect illustration of choosing in bisexuals, who can't seem to "choose" which sex they prefer. It is a choice in the end, even if it's an inclination one is born with, as I said in my original argument. I don't even begin to know how you came to compare gay marriage to allowing someone with dyslexia to marry? Re-read my original argument about the necessity of marriage being male/female. Marriage is a holy union between a man and a woman—it is not a civil union (although many treat it as such)—and that is why so many people have a problem with legalizing gay marriage. It would erode the foundation and meaning of marriage according to God, which is sacred to believers. You don't want to believe in God—hey, that's between you and Him and every human being has that free choice—no one is forcing or condemning anyone. All that believers are doing is defending their faith-based, holy sacraments so that others can't redefine them when they don't even believe in them. I mean there really is a contradiction there, right? Christians don't marry for financial reasons (at least they're not supposed to) or things like that—it is to pledge the marriage to God, to request His blessing.
Let me ask you something: What's wrong with homosexuality being a choice? I mean, if homosexuals are confident and proud of their sexual preference, why the need to say that the trait is inborn? Why all the shame?
"Fundamentalism" is defined as a strong adherence to any set of beliefs in the face of criticism and unpopularity. I am by no means a perfect Christian, but I am trying to be an authentic Christian and not a casual one, so I guess if that makes me a fundamentalist, then I guess I am? But be careful about labeling when you so clearly and "fundamentally" adhere to your own beliefs. Diversity goes both ways my friend. ;)
Oh, and Prop 8, was voted down by a democracy, not by religion—the majority deemed it not to be acceptable, to use your own words.
Don't take lightly something as grave as being condemned to hell. How can someone be a wise prophet but also claim they are the son of the living God, and not be in actuality, totally insane? You either accept Him at His word, His miracles and teachings, and as being "one with the Father" and the Savior of the world, or you deny all of it. He can't be both—a prophet is defined as a person who speaks by divine inspiration or as the interpreter through whom the will of God is expressed or the chief spokesman of a movement or cause—His cause being that He, the Messiah, had arrived according to prophecy and to share the good news that He was the Son of God and that all men must believe this, and repent in order be forgiven and inherit the kingdom of God. So, it's one or the other. (Hint: Jesus IS the son of God.)
Wow. You guys really DON'T see your own hypocrisy?
"Using ad hominem attacks in my argument"—please—you mean like you do all the time? Let's see, you call people "_ucking stupid", "thick", "delusional", etcetera, etcetera... But when I point out obvious infantilism (unless of course you think screaming "LALALALALA, COVER MY EARS" intelligent debating??), that's wrong? Pointing out obvious facts like his immature behavior is wrong—but cussing, or trying to switch the subject all the time, or not being able to comprehend believers' points in the first place so you have to resort to being condescending to them is what you call mature, intelligent debating? I see...
You didn't have to tell me your age—I guessed it the first time you responded to one of my debates.
Best of luck to you both. I truly mean that. I don't like the way you think so highly of yourselves or the way you talk to people, but that's how you've chosen to live and conduct yourselves. I WILL pray for both of you. And for any offense I have caused, or things you haven't been able to understand, I do apologize and hope that you'll read with the goal of attaining truth and not arguing with people for the sake of arguing in the future. If you want people to take you guys seriously, then present your points intelligibly, be respectful of others, quit being condescending, and LISTEN.
Peace.
Yes and no. I personally believe in Jesus. And I accept that atheists very much believe in their view. Atheists and Christians coming together is also how people get saved. And they can share similar interests, of course.
But can they ever agree to each other's opposing views? No. That would be completely contradictory?
1) He DOESN'T want there to be evil in the world. Have you read the Bible?
2) Yes, He does, but He wants mankind to want to completely eradicate evil and do it
by following His ways. By glorifying Him and doing it for Him and through Him,
He is the eradicator of it.
3) Yes, there is evil in the world. Why is that? Because MAN refused to let go of his
pride and thought he knew best, instead of following God's ways.
Real Result:
God loves us plenty!! He wouldn't have given us His word and His sacrificial son,
Jesus, to pay mankind's sin debt if He didn't. And that was a HUGE, LOVING sacrifice.
No, no. God loves us.
Here's how it works:
Yes, God is omniscient, and man is predestined AND man has free-will.
Let's say God is a general in an army—the head general. And "soldiers" (people) are following Him in battle. Finally, they come to the BIG BATTLE—the final battle, the biggest battle there will be against the greatest ENEMY. Many soldiers, by this time, have already fallen away from smaller battles, but there's still let's say about 100 left. First, they rest. Then the general says, "It's time. Who will follow me?" Out of the 100 left, about 36 step forward in line and say "I'll follow you." So the general steps in front of each of the soldiers that have stepped forward to follow him, and says "Okay, then I choose you." to each one of the ones that volunteered. Now, the general being so wise, and knowing His men so well, already knew ahead of time which ones would step forward (which ones were too weary, too afraid, etc.) But He wanted them to know in their own hearts of their own free-will that it was their choice. He didn't make them, but because of His wisdom, He foreknew which ones would step forward for the final battle and only chose them.
This is the best illustration I can come up with for how God gives man a choice, but is always still all-knowing.
Peace.
Jesus dying on the cross did pay our sin debt, in full— BECAUSE ...
God set the rules, and He is a JUST God, therefore He follows His own commandments. In order to be consistent and just and fair and good, He needed a sacrifice—sins were to be punished then. There's a whole great order to all of it: He sent His one and only son (the most loving sacrifice one can make, especially since His son was sinless and perfect and not deserving of such punishment) to pay the penalty for mankind's sins (because God loved man and wanted to be reconciled to him) and to point to a new direction by doing this (to answer your second question, which is what He does now—"forgive us directly" if asked in faith).... In the Old Testament, God made "the rules" (we'll call them) to help guide early mankind. When He arrives as Jesus, it was also to examine mankind's heart. So many people followed the rules for all the wrong reasons or with judgment and hate—Jesus came to examine mankind's "heart condition" and rectify it and fulfill the payment of sin for once and for all. The only condition is that people must believe Jesus came and did this, lest they insult the sacrifice God made, and God Himself. To me—there is no larger sacrifice—sending Jesus (God Himself, part of the Godhead) to Hell??? When you're God! Just to show mankind that You love him—even though You're perfect and created everything under the sun, You will submit yourself to the humilities of man and hell?—THAT'S love. There is nothing more amazing than that! So yes, a sacrifice was made. And He loves all of us more than we can even BEGIN to imagine. Look at the brains he gave all of you! :)
Read John 3:16
Yes. If people are going to discuss or lecture on the origin of the universe, then yes. Scientists have their theories, that NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY ARGUE OTHERWISE, can't be proven (otherwise they'd get on top of it and create another one.) Believers in God have theirs.
Yes. If people are going to discuss why, let's say (and you see this in the news sometimes), a sick person miraculously recovers from something deadly that scientists shake their heads at and cannot point to any "logical" explanation for the cure—then yes, the supernatural (GOD) can't be left out of the equation.
Okay, again you've proven that the only way you can TRY to win an argument is by being juvenile (you're what? Between the ages of 15 and 25, right? Dollar to a donut says I'm right.) And juveniles love to be right and have a very difficult time listening. Especially if it's contradictory to what they want to believe in. This is evident with you—BECAUSE—IF YOU LISTENED, YOU WOULD NOTE THAT I'VE SAID (COUNTLESS TIMES NOW) THAT IF YOU WANT TO USE ARGUMENTS LIKE "feelings and thoughts originate from our brain" YOU MUST THEN CONTINUE THAT LINE OF REASONING TO THE VERYYYYY BEGINNING. Do you GET IT NOW? Where did the brain originate from? Oh that's right—abiogenesis. Where did that originate from? You all say there doesn't have to be an originator. I DISAGREE. BECAUSE—THAT DOESN'T FOLLOW YOUR OWN STREAMS OF LOGIC. READ MY EXCERPTS MORE CAREFULLY—YOU'RE JUMPING ALL OVER THE PLACE OUT OF PANIC! Chill.
I'll try to address each one of these things...
1) It TRULY saddens me that you're an atheist and have turned away from God, especially when you used to be a Christian, a "strong" one at that you say. Why did you turn away?
2) Yes, there are two definitions of faith. There is faith in terms of worship, and there's faith in terms of complete trust in an individual or group. I have not been using the word according to the first definition, in order to prove my point: that people who trust in science over God, are no different from those that have faith in God. They completely have confidence in something. I have complete faith (belief) in God. That is why you all must quit using this word incorrectly, when anti-God folks insult God-believers for having some "crazy belief system". Understand the hypocrisy? Then, there is the leap of faith (the 2nd definition I gave) — where one must take that leap of faith (hope) that what they've put their hope will PROVE to be true. Once proven to their own satisfaction, then they attain the other kind of faith. Make sense?
3) I didn't assume you'd never taken a leap of faith. When I was using "you" I was using the "indefinite you" of the pronoun (not to a specified person—you-E223). I would never presume that. I would, however, based on your own words here, question whether or not your faith was ever sincere in the first place to then reject Jesus (and so soon after committing to Him—2 years isn't really giving Him a fair chance), wouldn't you agree (having studied what faith really means at your school)? But I cannot know your heart, so I will take your word that it was sincere (and pray that it will return.) Okay, let's see... you're all over the board now and wandering off point. But that's all right. What makes my leap of faith better than the leap of faith that other religious persons might take? Well, first off, I don't believe I am better than ANYONE. Not by a long shot. Your question might be better-worded to ask "Why do I believe that my faith in Christianity is the only true faith?" Well that's a great question, but it's also a big LONG testimony I'd have to share, but please know that I know my faith to be true because 1) I did my homework. I researched thoroughly all the world religions, and the only one that kept coming back to me as TRUTH—whether I liked that truth or not—had to be Christianity; 2) FAITH and EVIDENCE. Every time I turn to Jesus, there is He with the answers I need, and darn if He isn't right EVERY SINGLE TIME. To me, that's evidence.
4) I assume you meant the following question to be #4. And yes, the majority of all Christians believe in the fundamental Nicene Creed, and so I'm very concerned about this school you're attending? But of course all human beings are different!! What a bore if we were all identical. Of course Jesus comes to us in different ways and we relay our different (yet still shared) experiences with Him. Now if you're trying to split hairs over Protestantism and Catholicism or this specific church or that one, a true Christian knows that there are saved Protestants and unsaved Protestants and saved Catholics and unsaved Catholics and saved Anglicans and unsaved Anglicans....It's funny, atheists try to divide us more than Christians do. But go ahead—site the Crusades, site isolated cases of divisions in the church—really give it to me good! ;)
5) Don't be pissed about my closing remark on pride. Really, don't. I said that in the context of what I've seen throughout this site—a diversionary tactic is taken quite often, not always, but often here, when TRUTH enters the scene—all the cussing, condescending name-calling, so from what I hear about "scientists" (non-believing ones, that is) according to folks on this site—they wouldn't accept truth when they heard it out of pride. Which makes since, pride is mankind's greatest sin, it is the very essence of being anti-God—so proud of one's own intellect and abilities that God is not necessary—they've turned mankind into their God. And that is pride. Richard Dawkins' inclusion of a story about a fellow scientist admitting wrong to another scientist is nothing more than an attempt to manipulate and patronize the uninformed reader, like "look at how unprideful we are"—how BIG OF HIM, indeed!! Forgive me, but I'm not going to drool over someone who calls me delusional and insults our Creator.
Peace, man, peace...
No... You reported on endorphins which are produced when someone is excited. Sorry (big buzzer sound)—that is not love.
And you're being ridiculous and trying to go around logic by the back door, when you say that I would be denying that humans have intelligence and feelings if I don't acknowledge our brain, and that it's comprised of cells?????? What?????
Come on. You know EXACTLY what I'm talking about and are too afraid to approach it from a much deeper, possibly more abstract, higher plane of thinking: wisdom. Not academia.
Yes, God is omniscient, and man is predestined AND man has free-will. Here is an illustration of how it works:
Let's say God is a general in an army—the head general. And "soldiers" (people) are following Him in battle. Finally, they come to the BIG BATTLE—the final battle, the biggest battle there will be against the greatest ENEMY. Many soldiers, by this time, have already fallen away from smaller battles, but there's still let's say about 100 left. First, they rest. Then the general says, "It's time. Who will follow me?" (because He knows that some are too weary, too afraid, etc. to go on). Out of the 100, about 36 step forward in line and say "I'll follow you." So the general steps in front of each of the soldiers that have stepped forward to follow him, and says "Okay, then I choose you." to each one of the ones that volunteered. Now, the general being so wise, and knowing His men so well, already knew ahead of time which ones would step forward. But He wanted them to know in their own hearts of their own free-will that it was their choice. He didn't make them, but because of His wisdom, He foreknew which ones would step forward for the final battle and only chose them.
This is the best illustration I can come up with for how God gives man a choice, but is always still all-knowing.
Peace.
