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.
You've got it completely right, pvtNobody. Don't worry about it—most atheists (not all, some are very respectful), but a lot of them are condescending because of insecurity. The insecurity is related to clinging to a belief system that lacks any depth or true solidity. (How many times have we heard that "turns out science was wrong" and the "facts" they held so dear turned out to be wrong and have changed over time. Unlike Christ, who is the same yesterday, today, and forever.) If one is feeling insecure, one popular strategy is to project their frustration. Of course its results are hurtful and shallow and not based on facts, (which is ironic since they like to throw "facts" around a lot) Anyways, thus the sarcasm and name-calling. Let's pray for them. God won't condemn scientists who wanted to know how things work (He created and loves them!)—only those that still reject Him in the end.
I'm back. You guys kill me. LOL. Especially Joe's comment above...
Okay, laughing aside. You studied the Bible, right? Then you knew what I was talking about Him being "I am." So, just re-read that in your Bible. And YOU do not understand the definition of faith: an allegiance to a person or group or something that is believed with especially strong conviction. Now, you say you 'BELIEVE' these things because there's TONS of evidence backing your BELIEFS up, and Christians have no evidence. That is not true. You see "evidence" for a Christian is personal interaction first, and far deeper. And it's TRUE that it's difficult to prove that to someone like you, because, you're right in the aspect that you must first have faith—a person studies, researches, a "calling" usually comes, then if you're the skeptical type (like I and many other Christians were) you continue looking for other answers, desperate to be RIGHT and not proven wrong, continually studying & researching, and then you must take the leap of faith. Then, and only then, will God PROVE HIS EXISTENCE—suddenly you're changed: every thought, feeling, motivation, argument is changed, and more and more He reveals Himself to you... I have faith because I DO have the evidence to back it up. And no amount of testimony will prove that to you—you must discover this for yourself. Oh, and I was an atheist for 20 years and made all of the same arguments as you all. You say you "don't trust scientists because they say they're right, you trust scientists because TONS of other scientists have done the same tests and gotten the same results".... WELL??? So have Christians!! 1/3 of the world is Christian, and we all share the same experiences.
Back to God in the DNA and "some day it will proven because science will prove it." Cool!!! (By the way, that's the last time I'm going to explain that the two are not exclusive. There are many, MANY scientists that believe in God and are the first to say, "Science can't explain this or that...") I believe that science could possibly prove the DNA is God's—but I doubt they'd confess that. Just as you wouldn't believe it if some of them said it was... That's called PRIDE. Cheers.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. You're completely misunderstanding me. For one thing you did not rebuke me, you called me a name. I believe it was "thick." That's not rebuking someone, that's insulting somebody. I, in fact, rebuked you for doing so.
You've put your faith in mankind. I've mine in God, who created mankind, who thus created and realized many, many wonderful things about our world, including cures for diseases, on and on. My point is, which you seem to keep missing is: Who gave them the brains and the wisdom and the desire to do these things? I believe God did. I have not denied the validity of science at all—you're completely reaching. Read my other blogs and arguments. I believe God created scientists. God created those brains you admire more than God's. Science and God's existence don't have to be exclusive? Faith in God does many good things. Faith has done bad things. Science has done good things, but make no mistake, science has done bad things as well—chemical warfare, the creation of guns, drugs that hurt people, on and on. I guarantee you that science, with man behind the wheel and his "no need for a God", has done more harm to society than faith ever has. And if you don't know that, than you're not as smart as you think you are. But you know what? I'm not going to argue with you anymore, because you're not really listening. Best of luck to you. Peace.
Careful. Do not call me names, both of you. Why is that necessary? Your name-calling and pseudo intelligence in an attempt to win an argument only reveals your ignorance, not to mention proves your need for God.
Assuming you really have studied your biology and know your scientific videos, who then (in response to the video submission) created molecules, pH (that's the measure of the acidity of a solution to all of my fellow thick-headed nut job fantasy believin' Christians 'cuz ya know we never picked up one of them there "biology books" or got an education at one of them there IVY LEAGUE—what does that even mean?—schools), fatty acids, pre-biotic environments, thermodynamic, mechanical, and electrical forces? Who invented those first—in order to produce abiogenesis? You see, you're both missing the bigger picture just to be right. And to the first one that insulted me: MAN created calculations. Maybe they're right. I don't know if the world is a billion or 10 billion or 10,000 years old. And neither do they. How does measuring fossil samples mean that God doesn't exist? And really: You want to tell me that an explosion of rocks or abiogenesis, without first being touched by something supreme (to have the mind to create things like this), created Phillis Diller? The Gulf Stream? The tarantula? Birds of Paradise? Socrates? Coconuts? The grasslands? The killer whale? Dogs? Michael Jordan? Mount Everest? The octopus? Tobacco? Emotions? The stars in the sky? And you? Come on. What's ridiculous now? THAT'S fantastical.
Here's one for ya.
God was sitting in Heaven one day when a scientist said to Him, "God, we don't need You anymore. Science has finally figured out a way to create life out of nothing - in other words, we can now do what You did in the beginning."
"Oh, is that so? Tell Me..." replies God.
"Well," says the scientist, "we can take dirt and form it into the likeness of You and breathe life into it, thus creating man."
"Well, that's very interesting...show Me."
So the scientist bends down to the earth and starts to mold the soil into the shape of a man.
"No, no, no..." interrupts God, "Get your own dirt."
David, you seem to, in most of your arguments I've noticed (I've participated in a couple of other debates a few 'religion' doors down recently—I'm new to all this), seem to equate God with man? God is not man. He is a God—the GOD, which means He just IS. That's why he calls Himself, I AM. This is difficult for many humans to grasp, but then that's what makes Him different, and far superior to us. So to use the outdated zero x zero theory doesn't work with Him (and never did). And so, obviously, to answer your continuing line of questions, God made the rest of "the dudes" (mankind). But admit it, you knew that.
And David, how do you know that the world has been evolving for billions and billions of years? Because some scientists said so, right? So you BELIEVE (have FAITH) in their "facts"? Despite the fact that their theories can't be tested, because for a scientific theory to be proven fact, it must be able to be tested, which means they all will need to live at least 3 billion and 1 years to see if any of their 3 billion year theories were actually correct. Hmmm?...
No one knows and no one will ever know whether that code is God's DNA. It's not really about that anyways, is it? It's about faith. Read my other stuff in "Does God really exist???" and "Do God's [sic] exist?" There are some tie-ins to this debate.
Peace.
"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." —Genesis 1:27
Our Lord, in His answer to the Pharisees concerning divorce, refers to this passage in Genesis and confirms its special application to marriage. "Have ye not read," He said, ‘that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female? and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."' Marriage is derived from the Lord, for male and female. It has its highest and perfect form in Him, for in Him love and wisdom are one.
So how can gay marriage hurt any one? This is a very deep, complicated question and answer. (And please know, anyone that believes they are gay out there, I am not judging you. You are not horrible, and it is only my responsibility to share the truth of God's word to those who may stray from it or don't understand it.) It hurts God, don't you see? All sin does. Whenever man decides what is actually right and moral for himself, independent of God's wisdom, he always hurts himself because he has disconnected himself from God's plan for his life. And if he strays from God's plan, the course he takes can affect all of humanity—like the domino effect.
I take it for certain that the physical satisfaction of homosexual desires is sin. However, this leaves the homosexual person no worse off than any heterosexual person who is, for whatever reason, prevented from marrying, or from participating in sex outside the sanctity of marriage. Or any other sin for that matter.
People—primarily the homosexual community—say, "Who are others to say who we should be able to love?" (or in this case, marry) Let me ask you this: Have we not all loved our our same-sex friends as much as we've loved the opposite sex? I have loved my friends as much, sometimes more than a mate (after all, the opposite sex is oh so confusing at times!) But the difference is we do not desire to have sex with them. Aha—therein lies the heart of the controversy over homosexuality, and homosexual "marriages." You see the truth is, it's not about "love"—it is about sex, and who these people desire to love, is who they desire to have sex with. I can already hear everyone saying, "So what?! Of course people want to have sex with whomever they love..." But no. Sex has been perverted and removed from its original design. First we love, then we marry, then we consummate our marriage (it is just the icing) and the marriage (the love) is preserved through commitment before God. Again, I hear folks saying "Well that's what homosexuals want to do!"
First, we must understand that love begins with God. So many people misread and misuse Scripture and quote Jesus as saying, in regard to what the highest commandments are, "... to love thy neighbor as thyself..." for their arguments. But note that Jesus says, "commandmentS"—plural. Immediately proceeding "love thy neighbor as thyself" He says the first and greatest commandment is "You shall love thy Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." [Following is the second greatest commandment] "Love thy neighbor as thyself." So if homosexuals reject God's teachings on love and marriage and sex, how then can they use the argument that 'they just want to be able to love whomever they want' ? —They actually want to have sex with whomever they want, otherwise they would just remain the best of friends, you see? That is not the same. And then, they want to take it a step further, and sanctify it in holy marriage. This is re-writing the Bible to suit their own desires which is strictly forbidden.
People may love whomever they want. They just can't have sex with whomever they want. Well, actually they CAN—there is free will. Some say they were born this way. I say that in some cases this is actually true. In many cases it is a choice. But let's say they were born that way. There are alcoholics and depressed persons and naturally promiscuous persons and all kinds of burdens passed on in birth—this is what's called "our cross to bare"... Sometimes we have to make the choice to sacrifice an urge or desire to sin and in turn use this struggle for the good of all. Or we can succumb to it and let the consequences fall where they may. But I'd say 98% of our population has some sort of dilemma to struggle with. Like all other tribulations, it must be offered to God for His guidance on how best to use it.
And the American government has made separation of church and state very clear. They must, therefore, be consistent. The government has no right to redefine marriage in its holy context. If they stepped in and redefined marriage, a whole bunch of other decisions they've made concerning separation of church and state (removing the flag from classrooms, the commandments from courthouses, etc.) would then have to be reversed. They can't have it both ways, and they know this.
Peace.
Please don't turn away from God. I've just joined this forum and read your response and it concerns me, and Him, I assure you.
Do you believe in love? In hate? In truth? You cannot see or touch these things? You only see and touch the results of these things. God is the same. I used to believe as you (reversed—I started out as an atheist and wasn't raised in a Christian home). Let me ask you this: Do you feel in your heart of hearts that the writings in the Bible are lies. What is untruthful about them? I used to think, when I was a know-it-all adolescent, that some where in the universe, three guys were laughing "They bought it. They bought it! Got the whole world to believe it!!" But of course, that's a very childish, cynical and typical-of-a-teenager view. The truth is three persons did write it, through man, with purpose and with love and IN TRUTH.
What will becoming an atheist do for you? Really? How would losing your faith help you in any way? It would turn you away from TRUTH, and that's the worst thing in the world. Talk to your minister. Or another one, if you're not happy with the Catholic church. Talk to HIM. I'll pray for you. Peace.
Oh, and for everyone else: God and science don't have to be opposed. There would be no science without God? God created scientists, too. There are many scientists who believe in God, so we shouldn't box them into a category of "unbelief."
Let me ask all of you this: Does love exist? Show me—prove it. Does hate exist? Show me—prove it. Does honesty exist? Show me—prove it. Does wisdom exist? Show me—prove it. I want a photograph of these things. I want to see the DNA of these things. I want to be able to sense them with all five of my senses and be able to put them through the gamuts of "scientific" tests.
You see, what you would show me would be the RESULTS of these things. Someone hugging someone else with a smile on their face PROVES love, right? No. That is the result of someone's love. No, I want to see "love" itself. You see, you can't prove it—it is something inherent, intrinsic. But through love, by way of love, I can experience and see its truth and reality. That is what God is like. I have no photos of Him, no "scientific" proof, because you see He just IS—much like love, truth, intelligence, etc. It is BY Him and through Him, that I see everything else.
Yes, God exists. And Him, and only Him (the Godhead of the Holy Bible), and if you do your research (there are many books I studied that give you full descriptions of all the world religions, including their own "bibles") and you are interested in TRUTH, which should be the ultimate goal of all religion (if it is otherwise, to practice what your parents practiced or to "feel good" about yourself let's say, then you are practicing something else and more power to you, but have not, in fact, found TRUTH)—then you will ultimately fall into Christianity. You can't find any flaws in Him that draw you away from TRUTH—even the teachings that you don't like, or make you uncomfortable, or would like to disagree with—you can't help but empirically know you've discovered TRUTH.
Then, it becomes a matter of faith. It is ultimately up to us—now, will we believe His word? And follow and obey this truth? It's all up to us. But it saves you, I promise.
And I wrote this in another debate a few doors down and would like to add here: Do you really believe (note the word "believe"—the fact is, everyone has a "belief system" and worldview, including atheists and evolutionists) that an explosion of rocks created the mudskipper, Niagra Falls, the Himilayas, the orange tree, Michael Jordan, Aristotle, the giraffe, diamonds, the oak tree, the tarantula, wisdom, fear, the sunflower, Mother Theresa, Van Gogh, olives, man's conscience, the stars in the sky, and you? Now THAT'S a fantastical belief. Nah...
Just ask God. Ask HIM if He's real. Look all around you. Keep your heart and eyes and mind open. You'll see.... He'll show you. He IS.
Peace.
I just woke up, unable to sleep, thinking about my art. I wondered more about the Christian worldview on art, and so I hopped on the net to research it. Ironically, look where I wound up? This is the very first time I've ever participated in an online forum, but this site, with this question on God's existence struck me, so for the first time ever—I'm jumping in. Go gentle...
Have any of you ever really asked God whether He exists, and if He would reveal Himself to you? He will. (And the ways in which He will are numberless.) But it's true, you have to genuinely want to know about Him. For many years, I was an atheist. But God kept putting these "Christians" in my path. I constantly wondered about "Him." I was a very logical person. In fact, thought I knew a lot in general. Christ is particularly interested in those most of all. And I had all the arguments down pat for his non-existence. But something kept bugging me. You see, God was "calling" me. He doesn't "call" on everyone, but any of you that think about this discussion seriously and have ever wondered—consider yourself "called"... I did my research (being the "logical" person I was), and in the process He revealed Himself to me—which coincided with my research. Here was "THE truth" I'd always hungered for. Turns out He did exist. And it's the wises thing I ever did or will ever do.
The "science" thing: Here's what I contend: Do you really think an explosion of rocks created sapphires, the Caribbean Sea, Edgar Allen Poe, the cockatoo, the catfish, Lucille Ball, an apple tree, the dolphin, the giraffe, tulips, the marshlands, Degas, olives, Michael Jordan, the stars in the sky, and you? Nah. Not without something far superior touching it (and with purpose!). That is far more fantastical to believe than the Bible, any day of the week.
The "evidence?" Look around you. It's everywhere, every day.
And bottom line. As C.S. Lewis so brilliantly put it: Whether you believe in Him or not won't change the fact of His existence.
Just think about it—keep your eyes and heart and ears open. Peace.
