(W:#941)If Christianity were proven true...

[Logicman]

You keep saying that. However, after almost 2000 years, it should be obvious it's just a story.

God has a bigger timetable than what you're imagining. You've always missed out on the big picture in that regard.

 

[Indydave]

people become Christians because no one has ever died and actually returned to life other than Jesus and they fear dying
people become Christians because they fear that what they don't know for certain could be very bad and they fear dying
people become Christians because it's what their peers do....kinda like republicans
people become Christians because the teachings of Jesus are based in Love.....and that is the best reason

Christianity is a great religion.....it's the Christians who ruin it
I am a Christian

 

[Overitall]

people become Christians because no one has ever died and actually returned to life other than Jesus and they fear dying
people become Christians because they fear that what they don't know for certain could be very bad and they fear dying
people become Christians because it's what their peers do....kinda like republicans
people become Christians because the teachings of Jesus are based in Love.....and that is the best reason

Christianity is a great religion.....it's the Christians who ruin it
I am a Christian

I suppose that some become Christians out of fear of death (the unknown). I don't recall hearing this to be the case for anyone that I've interacted with. And of course there are some that become Christians due to peer pressure (although I don't see the connection between it and becoming a Republican). I would hope that the love of God through His son, Jesus, was the primary reason for most becoming Christian. There is Romans 2:4 "Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?"

Christians can give Christianity a bad image, but then there are so many that reflect greatly upon it. It most likely would not have grown to be a major influence in the world if that wasn't the case.

 

[Mircea]

How many have you destroyed?

Two.

 

[RAMOSS]

God has a bigger timetable than what you're imagining. You've always missed out on the big picture in that regard.

Uh Huh, Right.
The junk you say just because you have nothign but a book of stories for your viewpoint is really quite amusing.

 

[watsup]

God has a bigger timetable than what you're imagining. You've always missed out on the big picture in that regard.

How exactly do you know this? Or are you just making it up?

 

[bomberfox]

Won't need to. It will become all to apparent one day in and of itself.

Ill be waiiiting .

 

[RAMOSS]

God has a bigger timetable than what you're imagining. You've always missed out on the big picture in that regard.

Yet another unsupported claim. I guess that's all you have, oh, and insults and threats. I think if Christianity was ever proven true, a number of people that claim to be Christian would be very unhappy.

 

[bomberfox]

Balderdash. No real conservative would invent socialism. Perhaps a RINO would, but even then they have the ability to learn. Liberals, IMO, don't, so even after watching it fail time and time again they still push it, thinking they're the smart ones and can make it work. ROTFLOL.

View attachment 67360610

Oh no true scotsman nice… you know the conservative Bismark created what social security was based on?

 

[Individual]

God has a bigger timetable than what you're imagining. You've always missed out on the big picture in that regard.

But just WHO are the ones imagining something unproven/unprovable to be true?

 

[Logicman]

But just WHO are the ones imagining something unproven/unprovable to be true?

That would be Ramoss and Company, who make claims the Judgment won't happen. Their claim is without evidence.

At least I have the Word of God from Jesus, who went to the hereafter and came back and warned about it. There is considerable evidence for the resurrection. So you guys are at least one step behind the curve.

 

[watsup]

That would be Ramoss and Company, who make claims the Judgment won't happen. Their claim is without evidence.

At least I have the Word of God from Jesus, who went to the hereafter and came back and warned about it. There is considerable evidence for the resurrection. So you guys are at least one step behind the curve.

There is considerable evidence that the so-called “Resurrection” is just another fable with no merit in actuality. For one thing, the numerous “details” in disagreement between the narratives about it from MMLJ.

 

[Logicman]

Oh no true scotsman nice… you know the conservative Bismark created what social security was based on?

<chuckle>

Despite his impeccable right-wing credentials, Bismarck would be called a socialist for introducing these programs, as would President Roosevelt 70 years later.

"In his own speech to the Reichstag during the 1881 debates, Bismarck would reply: "Call it socialism or whatever you like. It is the same to me."

Social Security History

www.ssa.gov

Socialism is what socialism does...

 

[bomberfox]

<chuckle>

Despite his impeccable right-wing credentials, Bismarck would be called a socialist for introducing these programs, as would President Roosevelt 70 years later. In his own speech to the Reichstag during the 1881 debates, Bismarck would reply:

"In his own speech to the Reichstag during the 1881 debates, Bismarck would reply: "Call it socialism or whatever you like. It is the same to me."

Social Security History

www.ssa.gov

Socialism is what socialism does...

Yeah we know you would call Roosevelt a socialist. You believe he dined on grilled millionaires but nah he didnt.

Quote mining is a tactic of the feeble minded. I dont use quote mining to advance my arguments.

 

[Logicman]

There is considerable evidence that the so-called “Resurrection” is just another fable with no merit in actuality. For one thing, the numerous “details” in disagreement between the narratives about it from MMLJ.

All four Gospel writers and various epistles reported or confirmed the resurrection.

It’s not the resurrection that’s in question in the Gospels, it’s usually events that have occurred AFTER the resurrection that skeptics seem to always question. In addition, those events are not contradictory, they’re complementary. If you put them on a timeline (How many angels were at the tomb? Answer: What time was it when the first one appeared, and then the second?), then most of the alleged contradictions quickly disappear. Then there’s also what Cold Case Detective J. Warner Wallace calls “literary spotlighting.” One skeptic would argue that John’s Gospel only mentions Mary Magdalene at the tomb. That’s who John focused the “spotlight” on initially. But in reality, John was aware of the presence of other women at the tomb because later in the Gospel John wrote, “So she (Mary Magdalene) came running to the Simon and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, ‘They have taken the Lord out of the tomb and WE (“We”) don’t know where they have put him’” – (John 20:2).

Finally, if skeptics had done their proper due diligence of the Gospels, they would have known about Simon Greenleaf’s “Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts,” which places the resurrection scriptures in chronological order.

http://www.tektonics.org/harmonize/greenharmony.htm


p.s. I don't know of any skeptics of the resurrection who have really dug deep into the evidence. Have you read any of the following?

"The Historical Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas;

“The Historical Jesus of the Gospels,” by Dr. Craig Keener

“Cold Case Christianity”, by former atheist J. Warner Wallace

"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.

 

[Logicman]

Yeah we know you would call Roosevelt a socialist. You believe he dined on grilled millionaires but nah he didnt.

Quote mining is a tactic of the feeble minded. I dont use quote mining to advance my arguments.

You hate it when your follies explode in your face, don't you? ROTFLOL!!

 

[Logicman]

Ill be waiiiting .
View attachment 67360855

I suppose there is a waiting room of sorts for the confused.

 

[bomberfox]

You hate it when your follies explode in your face, don't you? ROTFLOL!!

Whut? Isnt that like JFK’s call me a liberal speech? Lol.

 

[bomberfox]

I suppose there is a waiting room of sorts for the confused.

Im not worried in the slightest. I can now focus on how my actions affect other human beings and not a third party

 

[Logicman]

Yet another unsupported claim. I guess that's all you have, oh, and insults and threats.

That's just more nonsense from the peanut gallery.

I think if Christianity was ever proven true, a number of people that claim to be Christian would be very unhappy.

Like I've always said, liberals are - generally speaking - history-challenged individuals. The truth of the resurrection has been out there some 2,000 years and still the Christ-deniers have their heads buried in the sand and continue to kick all evidences for it to the curb. You can still hear them wailing, "no mas, no mas, no mas"!! LOL.

 

[Drowning Man]

At least this thread admits that Christianity hasn't been proved true.

 

[Logicman]

Whut? Isnt that like JFK’s call me a liberal speech? Lol.

If JFK were running for president today he wouldn't be able to as a Democrat, not - as a Roman Catholic - having placed a pro-life justice (Byron White) to the Supreme Court.

 

[Logicman]

At least this thread admits that Christianity hasn't been proved true.

The preponderance of the historical EVIDENCE is in favor of the resurrection.

How many of these works have you read?


"The Historical Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas;

“The Historical Jesus of the Gospels,” by Dr. Craig Keener

“Cold Case Christianity”, by former atheist J. Warner Wallace

"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.

 

[Drowning Man]

The preponderance of the historical EVIDENCE is in favor of the resurrection.

I have a hard time believing that history could ever prove a miracle...that is, something that is beyond the laws of nature as we understand them.

You've heard of fish tales, right?
If I were to tell you that I caught a fish out of a lake, you might take my word on it.
If I were to tell you I caught the largest fish out of a lake that has ever been caught, I think you'd have a harder time believing me. Not out of the realm of possibility, but maybe you'd need evidence before you believed it.
If I were to tell you that I caught a humpback whale out of a lake, you probably wouldn't believe me. You would demand evidence before you dismissed me outright...and a lot of good evidence.

The difference is obvious. The taller the tale, the more evidence required to believe that tale.

The resurrection story is a damn tall tale. Again, I don't know if any "historical" evidence could prove it...even if you did have first-hand eyewitness accounts (which you don't).

How many of these works have you read?


"The Historical Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas;

“The Historical Jesus of the Gospels,” by Dr. Craig Keener

“Cold Case Christianity”, by former atheist J. Warner Wallace

"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.

I don't think I've read any of these, but I've read from other apologists. Meh.

 

[Logicman]

I have a hard time believing that history could ever prove a miracle...that is, something that is beyond the laws of nature as we understand them.

You've heard of fish tales, right?
If I were to tell you that I caught a fish out of a lake, you might take my word on it.
If I were to tell you I caught the largest fish out of a lake that has ever been caught, I think you'd have a harder time believing me. Not out of the realm of possibility, but maybe you'd need evidence before you believed it.
If I were to tell you that I caught a humpback whale out of a lake, you probably wouldn't believe me. You would demand evidence before you dismissed me outright...and a lot of good evidence.

The difference is obvious. The taller the tale, the more evidence required to believe that tale.

The resurrection story is a damn tall tale. Again, I don't know if any "historical" evidence could prove it...even if you did have first-hand eyewitness accounts (which you don't).

I don't think I've read any of these, but I've read from other apologists. Meh.

On what basis do you diss the supernatural?

It can't be from science because science has never shown or proven that God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist.

It can't be from history because history records any number of supernatural occurrences, among those are the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

So, show me your EVIDENCE against the resurrection of Jesus. I have evidence, you have a CLAIM WITHOUT EVIDENCE TO BACK YOU UP.

And if you want compelling cases - including numerous evidences for modern day miracles - read: “Miracles – The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts,” by Craig S. Keener


Also, an Official statement given by The National Academy of Sciences:

"Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection, and religious experience. Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."

"Scientists, like many others, are touched with awe at the order and complexity of nature. Indeed, many scientists are deeply religious. But science and religion occupy two separate realms of human experience. Demanding that they be combined detracts from the glory of each." https://www.nationalacademies.org/evolution/science-and-religion