- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Absolutely Christianity is healthy to believe in, and more it's a great way to live our lives. Being a Christian means, being Christ like. Christ means ''messiah'' which means Savior. If everyone tried to help others, even save them from their horrible circumstances, like orphans, the hungry, the poor, the heartbroken, then how much more a better World would we live in? If we all implemented Jesus' ways by serving others and thinking less of ourselves then WOW! Christianity is being Christlike, so of course it is healthy to believe in and apply to your everyday life.
Objective morals are those that are based outside of yourself. Subjective morals are those that depend on you, your situation, culture, and your preferences. Subjective morals change, can become contradictory, and might differ from person to person. This is the best that atheism has to offer us as a worldview.
Think about it, in atheism, there is no moral right and wrong. There is no moral "should and shouldn't”. Why? Because when you remove God, you remove the standard by which objective moral truth is established. In atheism morality is up for grabs.
In an atheistic worldview, lying, cheating, and stealing are neither right or wrong. They are phenomena to which, if the atheist so decides, moral values can be assigned. Sure, the atheist might say that we all should want to help society function properly and it does not benefit society as a whole to lie, cheat, and steal. But, this is weak intellectual reasoning.
Ron Paul calls it how it is, he is a straight shooter and points out the corruption in the government. He would get things back to the way they need to be, and the rest of the dirty politicians don't want that to happen. They want someone that keeps the American people under the fog and not knowing exactly how bad the government truly is.
To all you atheists, how can you determine between what is good and evil? That's like giving one student a ninety and one an eighty, that presupposes that one hundred is a real standard. My point is this; if there is no God, where did we get the standard of goodness by which we judge evil as evil?
I do not believe it is possible to, “prove,” whether or not God exists, whether to the atheist, or to anyone else for that matter. We can present factual evidence for the unbeliever to weigh and consider as a part of the process necessary to develop his or her individual faith, but we simply cannot, “prove,” there is a God because we are not God. What I mean is this: God will prove Himself to each and every person that takes his or her first step of faith; God tailors the inner, ‘spiritual witness’ that He feels is best suited and unique to each individual, and therefore HE is the ultimate, “proof,” of Himself and His existence. Seek and ye shall find.
Then why were they written hundreds of years after the events ''the stories'' you say the Bible stole?
Consider the case of Sargon’s birth. Legend has it that Sargon was placed in a reed basket and sent down the river by his mother. He was rescued by Aqqi, who then adopted him as his own son. Sounds a lot like the story Moses in Exodus 2, doesn’t it? And Sargon lived about 800 years before Moses was born. So the Moses baby-sent-down-the-river-only-to-be-
That sounds reasonable on the face of it, but what is known of Sargon comes almost entirely from legends written many hundreds of years after his death. There are very few contemporary records of Sargon’s life. The legend of Sargon’s childhood, how he was placed in a basket and sent down a river, comes from two 7th century BC cuneiform tablets (from the library of the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal, who reigned from 668 to 627 BC), written hundreds of years after the book of Exodus. If someone wants to argue that one account was borrowed from another, it would have to be the other way around: the Sargon legend appears to have borrowed from the Exodus account of Moses.
Luke, a Bible writer, is one example. His details about Roman officials such as "Sergio Paulus of Cyprus," "Gallio, the proconsul of Achaia," "Herod the Great," "Pontius Pilate," and "King Agrippa,"are all confirmed by ancient Roman historical records and archeology. Even unbelieving scholars agree that King David, King Solomon, the Philistines, and countless other persons mentioned in the Bible were real people, and that such cities as Ephesus, Philippi, and Thessalonica were real places. The ancient Ebla Tablets, a collection of 17,000 tablets discovered since 1968 and written around 2,500 B.C. mention the biblical cities of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar, found in Genesis 14. The Mari Tablets, 25,000 tablets written in 1,900 B.C., mention the names of Abraham, Jacob, Nahor, Dan, Levi, Benjamin, and Ishmael, found in the book of Genesis. Also a Canaanite bronze calf was discovered a couple of years ago and reported in Time magazine, confirming the Bible's account that pagan nations worshipped calves. There is proof just do some research without a bias heart.