What do you believe and why do you believe it?

[kneemailer]

Religion has invented a disease (sin) and offers us the cure (faith).

That is a misunderstanding of Christianity. "Faith" is not the "cure". Jesus Christ is the "cure" by which "faith" (as the mere conduit) takes hold. Sin is not imaginary, but is a very real 'disease' and which word is but simply the term to describe violation of God's laws, whether Physical or Spiritual (iow moral), hence 'murder' being 'sin'.

Even the 'placebo effect' proves 'faith' to be real, although it will not tell you which faith is real or substantial, or even how to test which is the truth. For that, you need something else.

 

[dcontroversal]

That you find infinite punishment funny tells me eveything I need to know about your morality. Explain how infinite punishment for the finite thought crime of disbelief can in any way be considered justice.

Ask God when you crack your knees and bow before him, I am sure he will explain it far better than I........

 

[kneemailer]

It would appear that the God of the Bible has been set up in such a way as to be immune from any form of criticism

Hardly. The God of scripture has been criticized and scrutinized ever since the fall of Lucifer.

Rom_3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

That which is presently and apparently 'immune' is 'evolutionism'; a dogma of the dead in trespasses and sin.

 

[kneemailer]

Paine also points out that everything in the bible is hearsay. For example, the message at the tomb (if it happened at all) took this path, at minimum, before it got to our eyes: God, angel(s), Mary, disciples, Gospel writers, .... .

Again, what an 'imbecile', not even understanding 'eyewitness' testimony is most powerful.:

"... Eyewitness testimony is not hearsay. He said/She said testimony usually refers to a situation where the only evidence is the testimony, or statement, of one person. “The Defendant pushed me and hit me in the shoulder.” This is not hearsay evidence and it is admissible. If the State was prosecuting a the Defendant for battery, the prosecutor could call the listed victim who would testify that the Defendant pushed and hit her. If the jury believed that witness beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury could render a verdict of guilty and the Defendant could be convicted based on nothing more than the word of one person. No physical evidence is required. The State doesn’t need a recording, injuries, fingerprints, or any other physical evidence. Of course, physical evidence can make a jury more likely to convict, as opposed to He said, She said testimony.

But, why isn’t this hearsay? The witness in this case, the victim, is not testifying to what someone told her. She is testifying to what she observed with her own eyes. If the witness points to a defendant and says, “That man pushed and hit me,” this is direct testimonial evidence. It would be up to the defense attorney to impeach that witness and convince the jury that the State has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant pushed or hit the victim. ..." - https://www.jacksonvillecriminallawyerblog.com/hearsay-can-prosecute-based-said-said/

God is an eyewitness, and able to testify, even as Jesus so said of Himself.
Angels were eyewitnesses, and able to testify.
Roman Guards were eyewitnesses, and able to testify (and did so, and their words are recorded by the scribes of the Sanhedrin itself, a court of law)
Mary was an eyewitness and her testimony is recorded.
Disciples were eyewitnesses, and their testimony is recorded.
Gospel writers, Matthew and John were direct eyewitnesses, and are recorded.
Mark and Luke were secondary to the primary events, but primary witnesses to the secondary events, and are recorded.

All of these testimonies agree, and are found in harmony. There is no contradictory report that is able to withstand scrutiny. Somebody stole the body, dogs ate the body, Jesus never existed, Jesus never really died, twin theory, hallcinations, etc, etc.

None of it is hearsay. You and 'Thomas' don't understand the word, or purposefully misuse it.

 

[dcontroversal]

Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins et al., have not been able to answer the problems and ramifications that atheism creates and it seems neither have you.

You continue to deflect.

He has no desire for truth and cites a man that went out with two witnesses by his side to attest to his denial of Christ with his dying breath.....

A fool has said in his heart there is no GOD <-----this encapsulates his position just fine.

 

[dcontroversal]

Saying blah blah blah is a sure sign you are losing the argument. How about some honesty from you? Go and read Exodus 21 and learn just how badly a slave could be treated. The slave could be beaten so badly that if they died on day 3, the slave owner is off the hook! Your position is morally bankrupt. Pal.

No, actually me saying blah blah blah is indicative of what is coming out of your mouth.....Kind of like the Teacher in Peanuts......a few words to describe what you are saying....blather, rigmarole, bloviate, etc......

 

[Primetime]

Where you at calvinist?

 

[kneemailer]

As this thread will be coming to a close shortly ...

Flee from your own ignorance, to the Truth before it is too late.

"... "Unfortunately, in the field of evolution most explanations are not good. As a matter of fact, they hardly qualify as explanations at all; they are suggestions, hunches, pipe dreams, hardly worthy of being called hypotheses.."-*Norman Macbeth, Darwin Retried (1971), p. 147.

"No one has ever found an organism that Is known not to have parents, or a parent. This Is the strongest evidence on behalf of evolution."- *Tom Bethell, "Agnostic Evolutionists," Harper's, February 1985, p. 61.

"As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in confusion [of halfway species) instead of being, as we see them, well-defined species?-- *Charles Darwin, quoted In H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation (1966), p. 139.

"Where are we when presented with the mystery of life? We find ourselves facing a granite wall which we have not even chipped . . We know virtually nothing of growth, nothing of life."-*W. Kaempffert, "The Greatest Mystery of All- the Secret of Life," New York Times.

"I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it."-*H. Lippson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin 31 (1980), p. 138.

"I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial.. the success of Darwinism was accomplished by a decline in scientific Integrity."*W.R. Thompson, Introduction to *Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species [Canadian scientist].

" 'The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination."-*Dr. Fleischman. quoted in E Meidau, Why We Believe in Creation, Not Evolution, p. 10 [Erlangen zoologist].

"The hold of the evolutionary paradigm is so powerful that an idea which is more like a principle of medieval astrology than a serious twentieth century scientific theory has become a reality for evolutionary biologists."- *Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), p. 306 [Australian molecular biologist].

"[Darwin could) summon up enough general, vague and conjectural reasons to account for this fact, and if these were not taken seriously, he could come up with a different, but equally general, vague and conjectural set of reasons."- *Gertrude Himmelfarb. Darwin and Darwinian Revolution (1968). p. 319.

"The particular truth is simply that we have no reliable evidence as to the evolutionary sequence . . One can find qualified, professional arguments for any group being the descendant of almost any other."-J. Bonner, "Book Review,"American Scientist 49:1961, p. 240.

"It was because Darwinian theory broke man's link with God and set him adrift in a cosmos without purpose or end that its impact was so fundamental. No other intellectual revolution in modern times. . so profoundly affected the way men viewed themselves and their place in the universe." *Michael Denton, Evolution. A Theory in Crisis (1985), p. 67 [Australian molecular biologist].

"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption . . The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem In pure metaphysics; he is also concerned to prove there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do . . For myself, as no doubt for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom."*Aldous Huxley. "Confessions of a Professed Atheist," Report: Perspective on the News, Vol. 3, June 1966, p. 19 [Grandson of evolutionist Thomas Huxley (Darwin's closest friend and promoter) and brother of evolutionist Julian Huxley. Aldous Huxley was one of the most influential liberal writers of the 20th century] ..." - Link

Do some actual reading - Link or even better, here

 

[posthuman]

but, I conclude you believe in yourself.

but he doesn't, really.

he believes he ceases to exist when he dies. he believes his consciousness, his personhood, is merely a pattern of electrical impulses randomly organized in a temporary conglomerate cloud of dust.

he believes he ceases to exist when the cloud is dispersed, therefore he believes he doesn't actually exist. he believes only the illusion of himself exists, and he embraces the illusion, because the only alternative is madness, and the cloud of dust has been shaped by evolutionary pressure not to admit to itself that it is merely an insane nothing, a temporary mirage in vapour.

 

[kneemailer]

he believes he ceases to exist when he dies. he believes his consciousness, his personhood, is merely a pattern of electrical impulses randomly organized in a temporary conglomerate cloud of dust.

An yet that 'randomness' is supposed to bring about order and intelligence? Obviously his own belief, has brought him to non-intelligence, and incoherency of logic, in effect he has become what he believed (faith) himself to be, the opposite of his beloved idolatrous 'spock', which is to say: 'illogical'. Even in Star Trek 5 - Final Frontier, "God" is seen upon a distant world ... hmm, wonder where they got that idea. btw, "ships" in scripture, are likened unto a church (Mat. 13), from which preachment happens.

 

[preston39]

Why are you spinning?
Christ is not the creator of the universe and He does not know the day and hour of His return...so how could He even predict His 2nd advent?

Matt....24:36 KJV....But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

This is a pure spin to accommodate ......................your slant.....and is not cricket.

If you can't address facts in a debate, I for one, will leave it with your chosen program.

Be blessed.

 

[Oncefallen]

Why are you spinning?
Christ is not the creator of the universe and He does not know the day and hour of His return...so how could He even predict His 2nd advent?

Matt....24:36 KJV....But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

This is a pure spin to accommodate ......................your slant.....and is not cricket.

If you can't address facts in a debate, I for one, will leave it with your chosen program.

Be blessed.

Pure heresy against John 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.

 

[Dino246]

That you find infinite punishment funny tells me eveything I need to know about your morality. Explain how infinite punishment for the finite thought crime of disbelief can in any way be considered justice.

That is a convenient, self-justifying way to frame the discussion.

The crime is not disbelief, but rejection of God. God offers you His life as a payment for your sin, and asks only your faith in Him in return. So far, you have rejected His offer. Die without accepting His offer, and your rejection remains without end. How is that finite?

 

[posthuman]

as if believing they will continue makes it more likely they will survive death

you haven't understood me

 

[posthuman]

It’s basically Pascal’s Wager

it may be implied by facts i presented, but it was never my argument.
that part, you heard inside yourself, and it wasn't my voice.

 

[posthuman]

An yet that 'randomness' is supposed to bring about order and intelligence? Obviously his own belief, has brought him to non-intelligence, and incoherency of logic, in effect he has become what he believed (faith) himself to be, the opposite of his beloved idolatrous 'spock', which is to say: 'illogical'. Even in Star Trek 5 - Final Frontier, "God" is seen upon a distant world ... hmm, wonder where they got that idea. btw, "ships" in scripture, are likened unto a church (Mat. 13), from which preachment happens.

that's humanism for you. a snake eating its own tail, telling itself how big it will grow from all the nutrients it gains, even while it devours itself.

 

[no1]

Some days I feel like a Deist but because I cant rationally define what that is I am more of an agnostic or atheist. Someone once told me I was an Ignostic - the whole idea of a God is a non-starter. But to answer your question directly I dont currently believe any God claim I have heard. Can you answer my question directly assuming it was aimed at you originally?

I believe I did.
You only responded to my second post.
Did you read the first one?
Just in case you missed it, it was post 633.

 

[Spectrox]

OH science settles it hey......so....was it a monkey, worm or electrified protein sludge filled pool that your descendants came from?

I am not an evolutionary biologist but I have at least some understanding of evolution and the scientific method. All you have on the subject is willful ignorance.

 

[Spectrox]

that's humanism for you. a snake eating its own tail, telling itself how big it will grow from all the nutrients it gains, even while it devours itself.

This is rubbish. Humanism isn't devouring itself at all. In fact some figures would suggest that religion is on the decline and humanism is on the up, particularly in America. This may be because people are beginning to wake up to the fact that religions have empty promises.

 

[Spectrox]

At one point of my life, being an agnostic for a long row of years, and looking for "proof" for God, I decided to believe in Jesus because He is good. Because He was worthy of me surrendering my life to Him, even if it were a gamble, Jesus was a worthy cause to risk my earthly life to. If I win, I win eternal life. If it turns out there is no God and I lose, I pretty much lose nothing because Christian life is a noble life to live, and my life would be wasted and meaningless anyway without Jesus in that case. So I said, heck, let's gamble. I bet my life Jesus is real. I did not have proof then. I did not know. I gambled.

Various proof showered me after the fact. Jesus was really real. Now I know that. But the real reason was that I was broken and I just surrendered. I was tired of wandering the wastelands of my mind that just waved the carrot on a stick but never provided me any actual truth. I checkmated my mind by placing a bet on my life.

People who do not believe are like a wife picking small fights with her husband about random things in the house, when she harbors a deep resentment against him that she had long forgotten and is not facing it heads on, so she picks little fights and one could be deceived and think she is really angry about him overlooking an unwashed cup or something else, and she herself is also deceived and unaware of the real problem. In the same way people who doubt God and His character find different faults with God and the Bible, but fundamentally this is because their relationship with God is broken and their mind is trying to make sense of this by seeking justification for the broken relationship. Once they go directly to God and the relationship is fixed all other issues disappear. I advise you to go to God, face Him head on, and do not relent.

I feel so much sympathy for you because I was once at this doubtful spot and I know well that nothing anyone else can say can talk you into believing. Even if they revived a dead person before your eyes, even a miracle cannot cause one to believe. I know what the mind of the unbeliever is like. It's a horrible place. I hope in God to deliver you out of that place, like He delivered me. Amen

Thank you for your gentle words and your advice. Your gamble feels like Pascal's Wager which I have dismissed as a good reason for belief. But if it truly works for you then who am I to discourage you?