Why do Christians use the Bible as evidence in Theological discussion?

Jump to Last Post 1-50 of 176 discussions (3126 posts)
  1. profile image51
    Rabgixposted 13 years ago

    Obviously if i'm an atheist and I don't believe in your God, why would I take your scriptures as evidence? That doesn't make any sense.

    Not to mention the bible has this nasty ideal that everything in it is true because God said its true.

    If it were that simple, everyone could publish a book and say God said everything is true and if you don't believe it you're going to Hell.

    1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
      Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      If you wan to teach math you use a math book. f you want to teach Christianity you use the bible. It's what it was made for. But it is only effective as a text book if you already buy the basic premise that there is a god. It is never going to convince anyone a god actually exists if they don't already think it does.

      They need a separate book of proofs god exists. But that would defeat the purpose of faith.

      That's the choice they are always talking about. You want to believe or you do not want to believe. Believe and god to heaven. Don't and go to hell. If they had proof then faith would e pointless. wink

      1. profile image51
        Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        But math is sure to exist. Your analogy has failed.

        1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
          Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          My analogy is fine. wink It isn't about whether one exists and the other does not.
          It was about how the books are used, to teach the subject. I was saying that when they use it to try to prove god they fail because it doesn't do that. It is only good as a text book to teach the subject it self once you already believe.

        2. MelissaBarrett profile image59
          MelissaBarrettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Math is a construct of man, much as religion is. Just saying...

          1. SlyMJ profile image61
            SlyMJposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            No, it isn't. If man didn't exist, maths (math) still would. 2 + 2 would still equal 4. The Sun would still be a measurable distance from the Earth. And the Pythagorean theorem would still be true even if there had never been a Pythagoras or anyone drawing triangles. Maths is not a concept that exists only in the minds of men; it is a fundamental quality of the universe.

            1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
              MelissaBarrettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Yes, but can you tell me why 2+2=4.

              Math is just man's way of explaining distances, amounts, etc.  It is a human construct.  I have never seen a 4 walking around in nature.  Nor have I seen a dolphin doing long division.  There are amounts in nature, to be sure, but the process of naming them and categorizing them is purely human. 

              Philosophically speaking, both religion, mathematics, science, and language are all human constructs created for the same reason: To explain things.  Mathematics is repeatable only because man created it to be repeatable.  As a whole, the concept worked because it was essentially just naming things.  Essentially though, it is still based on the principle "It is this because that's what everyone says it is"

              1. SlyMJ profile image61
                SlyMJposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                I think my reply went to the end rather than here. So much for my grasp of the fundamentals of life yikes)

              2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Math is the language of science and is used to communicate the concepts of our world. The English language, or any other language, fails to offer the same explanations found in math.

                1. Paul Wingert profile image60
                  Paul Wingertposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  There are three types of faith. One is proven due to the laws of physics and observation. For instance, if you put your hand on a hot plate, you will be burned. The second is knowlege and evidenced based faith which mathmatics is a prime example. If you have a room with three chairs and you put two more charis in the room, you'll have five chairs. The third type of faith is unobserved or unproven based on hope - religion is a prime example. When you die, you go (or not go) to heaven.

                  1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
                    Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Belief or faith in a fact is redundant and not required. Maths depend on logic, not faith.

                    If you know something with absolute certainty faith is not only not required, it is meaningless.

                    Faith is absolute certainty without evidence and counter to existing evidence. That's religious faith.

                    Anything less then that is belief in degrees.

                    However no belief at all is ever required. Belief in fact is not required because it is a fact. belief in a speculative idea is folly. Better to wait and see.

                2. profile image51
                  goldenfire80posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  math was here before man, the so called english language. think out the box

              3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Melisa, you are talking about the tools not something existing in foggy mind.

              4. Gary Davis profile image59
                Gary Davisposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QBv2CFTSWU   The answer to your argument.

                1. aguasilver profile image73
                  aguasilverposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Brilliant, if it was staged I love the humour, if it was for real, I fear for America.

                2. annlynn9 profile image62
                  annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  At my church, the choir director was also a high school math teacher. You can't have music without math, and no one in my church - or any other church I've ever attended - has ever decried math or its teaching. Also, there are many home-schoolers among Christian families, and they have very strict math and science programs.

              5. kripkrip420 profile image59
                kripkrip420posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Although I am religious, I would have to disagree with you about your opinion with regards to mathematics. As the poster before me stated, mathematics exists without the minds of men/women to establish its existence. There are general laws which govern our universe and even events around the big-bang. As we have no concrete idea as to what happened before the big-bang (if there even was a before), we can't say anything of mathematics existence. However, it does make you wonder...How did the big-bang begin? There must have been something mathematical that caused it's and our beginning. If it turns out to be true that big-bang was not the ultimate "beginning", mathematics ultimately becomes the messenger of time. In fact, who's to say that mathematics didn't govern the beginning of time itself? It could also be viewed, as others in history have stated, that mathematics is the language of God.

              6. Druid Dude profile image60
                Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                I can tell you how 1=3. The bible says that we live in a perfect universe. Math agrees. I have experienced proof that something equatable to God does exist, but my proof would not convince you. You, if that is your path, must seek your own evidence...and "God" will show you...if that is his plan. Tricky.

                1. Tlherald85 profile image62
                  Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Yeah real tricky

              7. mattforte profile image85
                mattforteposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Numbers and symbols are constructs of man. Math is not a construct of man, it is a construct of the universe.
                u u u u  ---- There are 4 u's there. Regardless of whether you use the "4" as a symbol, write it out, or use ë as a symbol for "4", it does not change the value.

              8. RyGuySF profile image59
                RyGuySFposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                2+2=4's existence as we read it is as Melissa says. It is just another result of mankind's ever present need to label, categorize and attempt to explain everything. I believe that by identifying limits and establishing boundaries we allow ourselves to quantitatively perceive our understanding of something to be greater than what it actually is. Taming/naming something allows the fear to be less frightening but also continues to allow mankind's assertion of a false dominance over nature and the universe in general. This somehow translates into the belief that because "I did something",  my existence is validated and I am now measurable.

                Although math is a language of man, in this case we see the actual equation in our familiar English with common amounts of items represented by our familiar cardinal numbers, 2 & 4. No, you won't see a number four walking around in the forest or the mall, but no matter what language we speak or where you live we humans recognize the same things but just use different words to describe the concepts.

                Math is repeatable because at this time it is currently the best (and most widely understood) medium we have for translating huge ideas that span across many pools of knowledge, culture, science and study. Math is a language that seems to make sense to a lot of people around the world. Aspects of achieving clear concise and measurable answers via math is comforting because we all know that math is the language of all life. Math is valuable for assisting in linking nature with evolution and conscious design. The proof is in the pudding. Read up on phi and the golden ratio. Again, more of man's attempt at explaining existence and death and all that fun stuff.

                In the end, truth does not require belief to exist. A name is not necessary for actual realization. Some things just are and that's not so bad.

              9. aravindb1982 profile image76
                aravindb1982posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Awesome explanation. Thank you... smile Am impressed.

          2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
            Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Melisa, you are right. We know who constructed what. Man constructed religion, not God. But faith was given to us by God and we were born with it. The same is with love.

            1. Cagsil profile image68
              Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Another statement that is partially BS. Yes, you were born with "faith", but how you use that "faith" is what matters. It wasn't given to you by a god and to say it was is absurd.

              1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                4186 vlad ©
                when you put
                your head into sand
                your but does not exist
                since you don’t see it

                1. Cagsil profile image68
                  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Are you trying to tell me you're an ostrich? I mean, if that is what you see in me, without proper knowledge and wisdom, you would only see your own reflection. So, you must be talking about yourself, because I've met very few religious folk who have any wisdom. They did have a little knowledge, but just no wisdom.

                  So good luck going forward. lol

                2. Angela Morgan profile image61
                  Angela Morganposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I totally agree with Vlad. Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

                  Have you ever seen an atom? a real atom? not just a picture. Science tells us that these tiny, very tiny, super tiny, these "can't see it with the naked eye cause they're so small" particles are the building blocks of this big, this gigantic, this "can't see the end of it" universe. People have to have faith in what these scientists tell us just as people have to have faith in what religious people tell us.

                  People have to have faith that this universe was created out of nothing, whether on purpose or by accident, or have faith that something was there to cause it to be created, materials and/or creator included.

                  1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                    A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    LOL! You don't need to have faith in what scientists tell you about atoms, you can actually find out for yourself. One would have to drag themselves screaming and kicking away from the Bible for a while, but it can be done.

                    On the flip side, when we try to find out for ourselves what religious people tell us, we find thin air... and nothing else. lol

              2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                The faith definition: is evidence, substance not seen. When one goes to school he find out shortly that he can believe that 2+2=4. The faith does not confirm 0+0=1 but 0+0=0.
                See atheists have only 50% brain cells. They believe natural, but not supernatural.  Believers know both.

                1. Cagsil profile image68
                  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  That's the whole point- evidence requires substance and substance can be seen. So, only a gullible person would believe that. Something that escapes you. hmm

                  1. Angela Morgan profile image61
                    Angela Morganposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Here is the problem with evidence requiring substance. A person's perspective can change whether you see the substance or not.

                    Take an optical illusion for example. You may look at a picture and see an old crone. You now have substantial evidence that there is an old crone in the picture. Another person can look at the picture and see a beautiful woman. That person now has substantial evidence that there is a beautiful woman in the picture. Now, because neither person can see what the other person sees, they can only assume the other person is wrong. And so the argument goes to prove who is right. Then I come up, and as I look at the picture I see both an old crone and a beautiful woman. I now have substantial evidence to back either person up.

                    So here is the choice that lays before you and the other person, you can either continue arguing, take my word that you are both right, or look at the picture again and try to see it from a different perspective.

                    Perspective is very important when viewing evidence for anything.

                    Another example: If you are at the foot of a mountain you cannot see the top or how high it might be. You have to move away from the mountain to see it in full.

                2. Angela Morgan profile image61
                  Angela Morganposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I only half agree with you vlad, not all believers know both. Extreme right wing Christians for example don't believe in either.

              3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Cagsil, I still love you even you are rude.

            2. profile image0
              brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Man constructed God.  I think the generation of Hebrews at the time of mt sinai would disagree with that, probably for about 200 yrs after or even longer, well they still believe in it being from God. hmmm
              I suppose the best answer i can give is the sabbatical year of every 7th year they were not allowed to till or plant or reap from the ground. They were to let it fallow. Torah goes further to say that in the 6th year there would be enough for 3 years. Why would something that man made up go to this extreme to be so easily discredited. If man invented Gods ways i am sure this one law and a few others would be left out completely.

          3. WD Curry 111 profile image57
            WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            How long has math existed? I really want to know. Can you tell me when math came into being?

        3. lizzieBoo profile image60
          lizzieBooposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Maths is theory too, don't forget.

          1. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            No, it isn't. Math is proofs.

            1. lizzieBoo profile image60
              lizzieBooposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Look it up.

          2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
            Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            lizzie, math is both.

        4. Levertis Steele profile image72
          Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          You already have your unchangeable answers for this hubs, so, what is the point of attracting commenters, except to enjoy the most dangerous game, the thrill of hunting and bashing Christians for your sick pleasure? You remind me of the soldier who was lost in the jungle and did not know that the war was over. He continued to hunt., but. "It is finished," and the Victor has declared it. People follow someone who has something that they want. What do you have?

      2. mommygonebonkers profile image61
        mommygonebonkersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Well, you are obviously just asking this question to argue with Christians and try to sound superior, so I won't even bother to defend my faith to you because it's pointless.

        I would however like to ask you one question: Show me proof where science has effectively created something out of nothing.

        1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
          Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Not even your god can do that. Come now, be realistic. If there was ever nothing, nothing would exist now. Yet another reason the Christian idea of god is flawed.

          Nature, on the other hand, which is energy/mass transforming, is very creative. There is no god required.

        2. recommend1 profile image58
          recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          The proof is energy and matter - the question is how it came to be in the first place.  The debate would then be whether the element in the nature of things and non-things that we don't know that caused everything to come into being is by some natural physical action and reaction - or by some supreme being who was here before everything.  If you argue for the supreme being, then where did it come from - and you are back where you started.  And you have to consider why such a being would be necessary or useful, even more to the point, why would such an amazing (if unlikely) being want insignificant little pink blobs like us to kneel down and worship it.

          1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
            Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Right. That brings us to my ontological argument. If ever there were nothing at all then there would be nothing now. So that means something has always existed.

            Of course even saying if there were ever nothing at all is a meaningless phrase and just a way to talk about it.

            But because energy/mass can not be destroyed and can not be created, and we know it exists, energy/mass is a better candidate for something that always was and always will be in one form or other, than a super being no one has evidence for.

            It does not mean energy/mass actually is what the religious call  god, but it is the best model we have at the present.

            1. recommend1 profile image58
              recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              I agree - except that I suspect that matter/energy is in a permanent state of creation.  The concept of something always being in existence is not really valid, maybe because the idea of something with no beginning or end is beyond our imagination (hence making it a god (father) may be easier to get a grip on).

              I suspect that in time we will find that there is only 'something' because otherwise there can NOT be nothing.  Like there cannot be spaces between objects without objects to create the space.  I also suspect that the idea of anti-matter will not be so far from the truth in some form or other, which could of course be anti-energy.

              1. mommygonebonkers profile image61
                mommygonebonkersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                I'm hearing a lot of run around talk that's supposed to sound intelligent and make me feel small and dumb but in a nutshell no one answered my question because you have zero proof.
                And if it comes down to having faith in an Almighty, Infallible God that has always existed or some tiny insignificant blob that somehow miraculously did all the right things to create a beautiful, perfectly ordered universe with millions upon millions of stars and planets and animals and people. My money's going on that God every time.
                How did so much incredible diversity come from one eternal blob?

                1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
                  Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Which one eternal blob would that be? wink The totality of existence? Al the energy/mass in the universe or multi verse? Tiny is relative.

                  You have to understand the laws of physics to get a sense of how energy transforms and is almost infinitely creative. The most profound revelation of my life happened when I discovered the laws of thermodynamics. It was a truly religious experience. It explains exactly how all this works.

          2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
            Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            You know brain has 1400 Gr. And you are boasting you can figure of God.

          3. WD Curry 111 profile image57
            WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            The supreme being can speak on his own. If you were God and someone hated you, would you talk to that person?. In the Bible God says (now this is talking to believers [not unbelievers}who are off task, not putting their hand to what they should be doing, chasing after wanton pleasure, exploiting the weak and defensless, un-following people who rubbed them the wrong way in a forum and stuff like that.) he isn't speaking to these obstinate,stiff necked adulterous believers becase they are facing in the wrong direction. He uses language that would be the modern equivilent. Of Hey! Dimwits, I would smack you awake, but I don't waste energy on stuff like that. If you keep on walking in that direction you find yourself neck deep in donkey dung and you will hollering for me to come get you out again, Come on think about the Christians you know. Most of them hqve to unbutton their shirt to see where they are going, how muck=h money do the gullible idiots give to obvious hucksters who flaunt the successful ruse from gilded, velvet upholstered chairs?.He would knock those villans out of their seat, but for some odd reason, he is going to put the consequences off untill later. Go figure . . .things haven't changed that much.

        3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
          Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          mommygonebonkers, excellent question.

          1. Cagsil profile image68
            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Actually, it's not an excellent question, which shows that you don't understand science and neither does the person who you responded to.

            It wasn't nothing that the Universe came to be from. That "nothing" was actually something, but it was something that is beyond measurements, which appears as if it was nothing.

            1. Levertis Steele profile image72
              Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              @mommygonebonkers: Your question was excellent and thoughtful.

            2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
              Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Cagsil, I am asking you to do me favor. Please send me your research, scientific papers (to read) what you published. Have you ever work in scientific lab? Please send me references and articles. Thanks.

              1. Cagsil profile image68
                Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Send my research to you? You're joking right? Send you scientific papers I've published? Again, you're joking right? I'm not a scientist. Then again, I also don't need to be a scientist to understand the singularity.
                I don't need to have worked in a scientific lab to understand scientific knowledge already available to humankind.
                References? Again you must be joking. If you're unable to recognize knowledge already available to humankind and how it was accumulated, and the reasoning behind it, then you've a lot to learn.

            3. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              The simplest life form known is the single cell. To create the single cell, you need proteins which are not found anywhere in the natural world, but are created by other cells. Therefore, you need a cell to produce another cell. It is impossible to create the first cell as there are no proteins. Evolution can not find an answer to where the first cell came from - so it avoids the question smile

              1. JMcFarland profile image69
                JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                evolution does NOT address the origins of life.  How many times do you have to be told that for it to sink in?

                1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
                  MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Biblically, it's all rolled together.  He seems to have difficulty with the concept that it is not so outside of the Bible.

                  To be honest, I can't grasp most of the "origins of the universe" theories myself as they seem to be based in hard math sciences (physics mainly, just can't grasp physics)

                  Evolution I grasp more from an anthropological standpoint than from a biological one.  My eyes tend to glaze over a bit when we get to evolutionary biology.

                  The Bible has the lure of explaining these exceptionally difficult concepts very simply.  Unfortunately, it implants the "It all happened at once" idea deeply into the mind.  It's almost impossible to shake that.

                  1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                    Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Macroevolution (Darwinism) claims that all things came from the same primal source - the 'primordial soup.'  Specific evolution, or microevolution states that all animals evolve or adapt within their own species, and Christians agree with this.  Is there something I'm missing?

                  2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                    Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Or, how about this, "For an atheist to be consistent with the very idea of atheism means that debating is absurd. The whole concept of debate assumes someone is right and someone else is wrong; so right away you are assuming a standard by which this truth can be measured, i.e., absolute truth. However, the atheist will deny absolute truth from the onset. To be a true atheist, you must eventually deny all knowledge.
                    The concept of atheism eliminates the very need for debate. If the atheist’s worldview is correct, then we are nothing but the result of accidental chemical processes and our thoughts are merely chemical reactions that take place in our brain. Therefore, nothing you ever do, or say, or even believe, matters. In the end, we all go back to “star dust.” So, why argue? Why waste your time talking to someone about the truth or falsehood of something when it doesn’t matter in the end?
                    Atheists will respond to this accusation in a couple of different ways. With incredibly shallow logic, the atheist may reply, “Well then, why do you argue for the existence of God?” Thinking that they’ve really pulled one over on you, but in fact, all they’ve done is commit a logical fallacy called the “Too Quote” fallacy or “You Too” fallacy.  In essence, what they are saying is, Well you argue for your view so I can argue for my view. When this response is given, you know that the atheist does not understand the argument you are putting forth. They are not giving a valid reason for why an atheist should argue in the first place. You see, since God exists, it is right for us to argue for his existence. However, if atheism is true, then arguing has no purpose. Some atheists might respond, “I argue so that America will not be a Christian nation. The idea of a Christian nation means that we would kill homosexuals, stone our disobedient children, and all have to wear long skirts and cover our heads.”
                    The very idea of arguing for atheism shows that they do not really believe what they claim they are saying they believe. The premise is that atheists have no reason, no basis, and no foundation for arguing. And in response to that accusation what will they do? Argue."

              2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                That is a another lie and an admittance to not know anything about evolution.

      3. GinaCPocan profile image62
        GinaCPocanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        If you wan to teach math you use a math book. f you want to teach Christianity you use the bible.

        This seems pretty logical to me.

        1. wilderness profile image76
          wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          You left out a rather important point: that Christianity can only be taught to one that either already believes or strongly wants to believe if you use only the bible.

          The bible can only be considered true if you already believe it is; there is little supporting evidence and none at all for the miracles and other supernatural happenings described.

          1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
            Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            wilderness, I do not want to put you down but you are in wilderness. The faith and Word of God could be tested. You are talking about miracles. 20 years ago I got tumor (cancer) in colon. God healed me by faith. No medicine radiation or surgery. 20 years later I got metastatic carcinoma to the bone (2 spine and one face bone). Two years later bone scan was repeated and all Ca was vanished. Thanks and glory to God! I did not have checked and diagnosed before, since I was asymptomatic.
            We do not see miracles, since we practice and exercise doubt about everything.

          2. Levertis Steele profile image72
            Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I once doubted the Bible but became a believer after multiple experiences that always led me back to Jesus, the WORD. Whenever I branched away to do my own things, I always ended back at the feet of Jesus, so, though I am far from perfect, I try to remain. I just get tired of being "dragged in." Something loves me, and I believe that something is Jesus.

            1. dfbishopsr profile image59
              dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Amen! Great testimony.God is faithful o never leave us nor forsake us.

            2. profile image51
              Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              But God's not real.

              1. profile image50
                paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                How could you say  that? Why to doubt the Creator God?

                1. profile image51
                  Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  What's your proof outside of the Bible that we even have a Creator?

                  And don't say faith. That in itself is just wishful thinking.

                  1. profile image50
                    paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    It is very natural to believe that the Creator God exists; like one believes in everything natural that exists.

              2. annlynn9 profile image62
                annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Hmm.  Before Columbus a spherical earth wasn't real, before Newton gravity wasn't real, before Schwarzschild black holes weren't real, before Einstein the atom wasn't real, and before Schmidt quasars weren't real. Well, even today there are flat-earthers who refuse to believe what is real, and even till the end of the world there will be those who reject the reality of God.

                "Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, 'Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us,' BUT He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision." Psalm 2:1-4

                1. Evolution Guy profile image59
                  Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  God is not real. This is not rejecting reality - it is embracing reality. See the difference?

                  Your Lord has me in derision huh? What a fantastic way to attack people and not be held accountable for your attack.

                  1. annlynn9 profile image62
                    annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    The words are God's, not mine, and one person's reality is just another person's future discovery.

                  2. Levertis Steele profile image72
                    Levertis Steeleposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Evolution Guy,

                    If God is not real, what would be the consequences for those who are "deceived" by His existence? If He is real, what would be the consequences for those who have rejected Him? Which of these two beliefs offers more and is safer? Use logic, please.

                2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                  A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  LOL! Comparing the real world to magical sky fairies? lol

                3. annlynn9 profile image62
                  annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  It is interesting that people who claim to be the reasonable, rational ones are the very people who can do nothing but ridicule and hurl insults. Where is the intelligent debate in that?

                  1. earnestshub profile image70
                    earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Where is the intelligent debate in endlessly quoting myths and pretending that is a form of debate?

                  2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                    A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Are you saying that intelligent people are not capable of laughing at the hysterical and fantastical things others believe and say? And, do you actually believe those fantasies are valid for reasonable, rational and intelligent debate? Seriously, dude.

      4. Eaglekiwi profile image72
        Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Not true in my case.
        I knew the bible was primarily about God,but I really didnt understand how he rolled (so to speak) until I started reading it..

        Proverbs was the first book.
        I guess I nibbled info here n there,decided I liked the food smile

    2. liftandsoar profile image61
      liftandsoarposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      OK, Rabgix, I'm gonna assume you are not just attempting to bait Christians and try to give you a serious response.  I think you are on to something to note that Christians resort to the Bible to prove their points.  However, as has been mentioned already, that should be more of an "in house" practice than a strategy for converting non-Christians to Christ.  When Christ and others quote the Scriptures, they are usually speaking to the Jews who already accepted the OT as their authority.  Paul, when he visited Athens, didn't quote the OT.  Instead, he made reference to his audience's longing to know God evidenced by the many monuments, even one to the "unkown god."  (in case they missed one)

      When I interact with non-Christians I'm satisfied to say that the Christian faith is a reasonable world and life view.  To assert proof of in any area outside of hard science is to assume a breadth of knowledge no mere mortal has. And that, by the way, is the biggest problem I have with non-Christians - their being so absolutely certain that their view of things is right.  Given the record of mankind, that takes a stretch far beyond anything the Christian faith asks you to believe.

      Now back to reasonableness.  Let's take the central tennant of the Christian faith - the substitutionary atonement.  We believe that, because of our sin, we have lost the right to receive any good thing from God. However God has made a way by which we can be restored to friendship with him.  He, in the person of his Son, accepted the penalty for our sin on himself.  He offers himself as a substitute for the believing sinner.  That is not only overwhelmingly loving, it is reasonable.

      The other day I foolishly (for the sake of this analogy, read "sinfully") cut in front of a truck that was in my blindspot.  Fortunately, no one was hurt, but I did knock the bumper off the vehicle.  $1,500 worth of body work.  An expense I had no way of paying.  However, I had an insurance policy (read a relationship with God through Christ).  I filed the proper reports (read, confessed my sin) and the insurance company paid the debt (read, forgave my sin).  Pretty reasonable, I'd say.  And I suspect you own an insurance policy as well.

      Note, I have not quoted any Scripture to you.

      One more thing. The persuasiveness of the Christian faith is not to be found in its intellectual "proofs" but in the loving principled lives of those who follow Christ.  In that respect, many of us have failed our Lord and you.  But, still, there is enough of it out there to arrest your attention.  But are you looking?

    3. GinaCPocan profile image62
      GinaCPocanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Rabgix, this was truly a loaded question and you know it. You knew you were going to incite an argument and you got one. I have noticed, you only poke your head out of the foliage for a second just to add your two cents, only  enough to add more fuel to the fire, when you think it may be dying down then pull it back in again to watch more reactions.

    4. AEvans profile image72
      AEvansposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Can you explain to me what you believe, so that I can understand how to answer the question? How do you think we were created? You say "if I am Atheist" which are the keywords for your discussion. Do you or do you not believe? Your word obviously leads me to believe that your discussion can take either direction.

      If you are Atheist, why would you even wish to have the Bible as evidence? You would believe in Scientific theory? It doesn't make sense to me that you would even argue the question. I wouldn't ask you to take the word of God as evidence just like I do not believe in scientific theory. Most Athiest's have read the Bible completely and came to there conclusion. Have you did that?

      God is powerful and you can bet your bippy, if you were in a plane that was going down you would probably be praying for what many of us believe in. You certainly would not pray to an amoeba. I can tell you this no where in the Bible is it written that people(human beings) go to hell. I have read that Bible front to back and I am Christian. People listen to what they are taught but do not always read the word themselves. So no worries you won't be cast into a lake of fire, but at some point you will believe.

      Who do you think designed all of this? When a mother carries a child in there womb, who created that little miracle? How are the sperm and the egg able to create a human being? I am a nurse and I know it is God's design. smile

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        lol

      2. autumn18 profile image55
        autumn18posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Who do you think designed all of this? When a mother carries a child in there womb, who created that little miracle? How are the sperm and the egg able to create a human being? I am a nurse and I know it is God's design.
        ------
        So God actively creates little miracles in the wombs of women? Not the soul of the unborn baby but the physical matter created from the connection of the sperm and egg. That needed God to happen? What makes him decide to let some women conceive and carry a child and some not? I'm just curious to see how people rationalize God creating the miracle of conception but then also letting horrible things happen. God's design must have flubbed up on me since I have not been able to conceive a child after years of trying.

        1. Levertis Steele profile image72
          Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Horrible things that happen almost always improve someone's character. We learn from horrible things. Sara, Abraham's wife probably said some of the same things that you've said after she was not able to conceive. Even though she was old, she conceived and learned some valuable lessons about faith in God.

          1. profile image51
            Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            That is so much bullshit.

            If your daughter gets gang raped tell her it happened so she could learn something.

            1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              It didn't happen so 'she' could learn something - it happened because of bad choices - which is something we ALL can learn from

      3. Eaglekiwi profile image72
        Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Well written and great to see you sharing your faith,respectfully smile

      4. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
        Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        AEvans, Thank you.

    5. profile image52
      ebemusicposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      if you don't believe in God don't even worry about the scriptures because they can't help you anyway.

    6. profile image52
      ebemusicposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The question is do you believe there is a hell? I promise you when Jesus returns you will wish you had believed in God.

      1. A Troubled Man profile image59
        A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jJySc7Ytihk/Ta2v_wkPYfI/AAAAAAAAAB8/4IL5F-IlA4g/s1600/church_lady.jpg

      2. profile image0
        jomineposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        You mean, "you will wish you had believed in me and my priests"?

      3. profile image56
        Apollonerosposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Lmao are you kidding me Your telling me that in a nut shell if I don't make believe the same thing as the majority I'm destined to failure or well eternal damnation do you even begin to understand how this is a manipulated society in which you are a slave your culture your religion your life worth is what you are told it is supposed to be. get off it grow up stop sucking your thumbs you don't need faith in something imaginarily absolute you say god is absolute but then say math and sience are not the same as god because they don't need faith and to prove god so that you don't need god destroys the point of faith but faith destroys the point of something absolute man discovered math and sience man has yet to discover god man has only discovered that religion gives man hope to get through the struggle of his seemingly insignificant existence but it is the world we allow our selves to live in that binds our minds and makes us think little of our selves has any one stoped to think that you are living in this life for the sake of the people around you and not a higher being I mean look at your arrogance you say you have a relationship with a supreme being but you can't even have proper relationships with the people in the world around you, I dare to say mankind will never ever know god until mankind truly knows mankind and all have a proper relationship with each other, it is inept and lazy and just down right an abandonment of your people your humanity and your responsiblity to say some god will come down to clean up your world for you, if that were the case why has he not come yet, well the only answer you could possibly come up with is the lesson has not truly been learned yet, so if that's the case I ask you what could that lesson possibly be if not that we need to get our heads out of the clouds out of the sand and quite being fourth graders saying who has less braincells and who has who's head in the sand or up they're butt

        1. profile image51
          stampschickposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          WOW!!  That must be the longest sentence in the history of the written language,  Apolloneros!  Nearly unreadable because of lack of ending punctuations.

        2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          It's says a lot when 90% of the scientists working in the field of micro-biology, believe that an intelligent, creative agent is responsible for the creation of life. This is because in the past 40 years this science has discovered such complexity in the simplest life forms. Complexities that were unknown when theories of evolution first started. Yet, most of the posters here, who do not appear to scientists in the least way, feel they can argue with what scientists admit. wink

          1. JMcFarland profile image69
            JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            where did you get your numbers from, or did you just pull them out of your rear?  Everything I've read and studies says the opposite of what you've claimed.

            There have been several studies over the years on the rates of atheism in the top scientists in various fields, the people who are recognized as being highly accomplished. This is a letter in Nature in 1998 describing the findings of the most recent iteration of this study.

            In 1998, members of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences were polled on their beliefs in human immortality and a personal god. Only 7% of the respondents reported belief in a personal god. In earlier versions of this study (in 1914 and 1933), with different groups of "greater scientists," rates of belief in a personal god are always less 30%.

            Moving down a step in terms of scientific street cred, there was also a 2007 paper which surveyed 1,646 academic scientists at 21 top universities on their belief in god. Their findings show rates of atheism at about 30% and agnosticism also at 30%, and find that the rates are not dependent on academic discipline; academic scientists in the natural and social sciences have similar rates of atheism.

            In contrast to the high rates of atheism among academic professionals, there was a study carried out by The Pew Forum on religious belief in the general population along with several other social factors, including education. 17% of American adults surveyed identified as "unaffiliated" and only 1.6% of the population said that the were atheists and 2.4% agnostic. The ~4% of the general population that identify as non-believers is clearly significantly different than the ~60% of professors and ~90% of top scientists who are non-believers. The Pew study also shows that in the population of adults with at least a high school diploma, rates of atheism do not increase with increasing educational attainment.

            This neat plot, from a Discover Magazine blog post graphs the amount of Biblical literalism in a specific religion vs the amount of postgraduate education level of its adherents found in the Pew Forum survey.

            As for students in the sciences going through a change from theism to atheism, a 2009 study of 26,200 college students over 6 years actually showed that students in the social sciences and humanities are more likely to become less involved in, and lose interest in, their religion than students in the physical sciences. The explanation the authors give for the lack of change among science students is two fold: 1) Religions have already effectively worked to integrate belief in science with belief in religion, so learning about science doesn't change the way a student views the world and 2) There's a lower level of religiosity in science students to start with. Very religious students are drawn to humanities and social sciences degrees, and have more potential for a significant change in their religiosity than the less religious students in the physical sciences.

            Bottom line: Becoming a scientist doesn't seem to make you an atheist, but badass scientists tend to be atheists.

            1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Well my friend, I could say those bits of info are biased. Or I could ask what happens to the scientists who admits a belief in a God, in a Darwinian society? Michael Behe, professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University, Pennsylvania, expertly demonstrates the overwhelming problems that evolution theory has in explaining the complexities of the simplest life forms.  For example, the system in the body that causes blood to clot to prevent bleeding to death is irreducibly complex. To reduce coagulation cascade in the slightest would mean certain death to an animal or human. Behe claims that, "no one on earth has the vaguest idea how the coagulation cascade came to be."
              Evolution claims that all life evolved through many gradual changes and mutations, yet scientists have discovered many irreducibly complex systems which did not evolve gradually at all, but are the creation of intelligent design. Note that to reduce these systems in the slightest would mean they would not work at all, not that they would work less efficiently. the defense system of the Bombardier beetle, the complexity of a bacterial flagellum, the movement of a cilium, the mind-boggling complexity of vesicular transport and even the immune system are all excellent examples of systems which evolution is totally helpless to explain.
              Behe points out that in america, evolution theory has become like a religion for many scientists, partly because of the heated debate amongst some Christian fundamentalists and scientists over the years. The fundamentalists attack the scientists, who in turn defend their positions for reasons that are no longer scientific. The argument has become one of pride, rather than seeking to discover the truth. Sadly, this positions has also meant that textbooks continue to be used in schools and universities which are grossly out of date, namely, because the alternative - teaching that an intelligent agent created the world - would be seen as a backward step and a defeat by liberal Darwinians.

              1. JMcFarland profile image69
                JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                you didn't answer my question.  I asked where you got the statistics that you claim state that over 90% of biologists are Christians - or believe in some other god.  If you can't point to a non-biased, independent study that supports those numbers, I'm going to assume that you just made them up.  Unlike your points that pull numbers out of a hat, what I posted points to independent studies that can be looked up and critically examined.  where's yours?

                The rest of your post is just an argument from authority/popularity and it doesn't address the questions at all.  I can quote single people all day long that refute your claims.  You're going to have to do better than that.

                1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                  Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  The numbers come from Dr. Michael Behe, in his book "Darwin's Black Box" p.239. i'm sure he cites the references in that book, which I can not look up as I do not have a copy available atm. I know you will say this is biased information, but nonetheless...
                  He is a Professor of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. He received his Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the University of Pennsylvania in 1978. His current research involves delineation of design and natural selection in protein structures. In addition to teaching and research I work as a senior fellow with the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science & Culture.
                  In addition to publishing over 35 articles in refereed biochemical journals, He has also written editorial features in Boston Review, American Spectator, and The New York Times. His book, Darwin's Black Box, discusses the implications for neo-Darwinism of what he calls "irreducibly complex" biochemical systems and has sold over 250,000 copies. The book was internationally reviewed in over one hundred publications and recently named by National Review and World magazine as one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century.
                  He has presented and debated his work at major universities throughout North America and England.
                  smile

                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
                    MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    I can google too:

                    Behe's claims about the irreducible complexity of essential cellular structures have been rejected by the vast majority of the scientific community,[3][4] and his own biology department at Lehigh University published an official statement opposing Behe's views and intelligent design.

                    and:

                    Behe served as an expert witness for the defense in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. Under cross examination, he was obliged to admit: [3]
                    That no peer-reviewed scientific journal has published research supportive of intelligent design's claims.
                    That Behe's own book was not, as he had claimed, peer reviewed.
                    That Behe himself criticizes the science presented as supporting intelligent design in instructional material created for that purpose.
                    That intelligent design seems plausible and reasonable to inquirers in direct proportion to their belief or nonbelief in God.
                    That the basic arguments for evidence of purposeful design in nature are essentially the same as those adduced by the Christian apologist Rev. William Paley (1743–1805) in his 1802 Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected From the Appearances of Nature, where he sums up his observations of the complexity of life in the ringing words, "The marks of design are too strong to be got over. Design must have had a designer. That designer must have been a person. That person is GOD."[4]
                    That the definition of "theory" supplied by the US National Academy of Sciences[5] did not encompass ID, and that his broader definition would allow astrology to be included as a scientific theory.[6][7]
                    That he had claimed in his book that evolution could not explain immunology without even investigating the subject. He was presented with 58 peer reviewed articles, nine books, and several textbook chapters on the subject; he insisted they were "not good enough."[8].

          2. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I'm wondering if this is willful ignorance or just plain blatant lies?

            Why are believers so compelled to lie to us as if we're little children trying to understand where the presents under the Christmas tree came from?

      4. Levertis Steele profile image72
        Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        @ebemusic: So true!

        @Apolloneros: You said,
        "you say you have a relationship with a supreme being but you can't even have proper relationships with the people in the world around you, I dare to say mankind will never ever know god until mankind truly knows mankind and all have a proper relationship with each other" So, so true!! How can we say we love God, and we prove daily that we do not love each other. " If we believe that "God is love," and we do not love our fellowman, we are liars. Now, the rest of what you said is another story.

    7. Pintoman profile image61
      Pintomanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Why do atheists say they use reason when they can't believe it exists? Where is the atheists proof that there is no God? You only believe in absolute proof right?

      1. profile image51
        Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Empirical evidence vs. an old book written ages ago

        If this is how your reasoning works then I suggest you give up on life altogether.

    8. Dim Flaxenwick profile image79
      Dim Flaxenwickposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      There IS NO Hell!!!!  Religious leaders for thousands of years have used this abhorent teaching to frighten people into ´´behaving thmselves´´  i.e. behaving as the religious leaders would like them too.
      For many years that meant poor people giving money to the church ,., oh the poor church......   Just look at the Vatican or remember that the Church of England is one of the largest landowners after the Queen.
      In America are the Evangelical´ Billy Graham type preachers EVER poor???
        l don´t think so.   Religion is a snare and a racket, but if you can find the time to read and understand the bible properly (just let it interperate itself) you´ll see that the whole book , fits together like a jigsaw puzzle, despite being written by Shepherds, Fishermen, Kings,  a tax colector, a doctor. and others with extremely diverse occupations.
        To understand and believe in the bible (not organised religion) is  true blessing and makes for a happy way of life.
      l hope l haven´t gone too far away from your original question.

      1. Levertis Steele profile image72
        Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Organized religion is a problem because there are so many! There are so many people in these religions who are earnestly trying to do their best for Jesus. How can a loving God overlook them? I believe that they will be saved, even though they are from a variety of religions. They are doing their BEST, and that means that their hearts are right.

        Your view of the Bible speaks volumes. Only one who studies it diligently can see the puzzle pieces coming together.

    9. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
      Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Mr. atheist, senses and faith really do not make senses. They are completely different levels.

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        You do realize the above statement is BS? Right?
        Only to the gullible. wink

    10. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
      Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Rabgix, you must be product of college professors. They never run any business except loan mover. They use Marxist's books. Bible never say it is all truth. The Bible is truly recorded. There is also devil's lie. Jesus was talking truth and it may set us free. Secondly, God does not want anyone to die or go do Hell. It's only depending on our decision.  You do not know anything about Bible.

    11. TJenkins602 profile image59
      TJenkins602posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Because the Bible says so tongue

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        And, if it told you to jump off a bridge or the tallest building you could find, does that make okay to do? lol

      2. Hollie Thomas profile image60
        Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Therefore, we must accept this as absolute truth big_smile

    12. Dave Mathews profile image59
      Dave Mathewsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Why did you bother asking the question since you have apparently already made up your mind what answers you will accept and what you want to hear. You are a closed minded individual.

      1. profile image0
        jomineposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        As if you are the most broad-minded person alive!!

        Luke 6:37 - "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.
        Luke 6:42 - "How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."


        At least try to practice what you preach!!

        1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
          Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          At least he has a theory to preach about wink

          They say black -you say white

          1. profile image0
            jomineposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            The same as politicians, and look where they have got us!! lol

      2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
        Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        In 2 Thess. 2 Paul was speaking of a future generation of Christians who would be deceived and led away into a great falling away from New Testament Christianity. He predicts that they would get involved in an unrighteous deception, “because they did not receive the love of the truth that they might be saved, and for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie, that they all might be condemned who do not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”( 2 Thess. 2:10,11).  "And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." John 3:19 smile

    13. profile image0
      jomineposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      What else they got?
      They obviously can't use reason and logic.

    14. Dave Mathews profile image59
      Dave Mathewsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      What would you have us use, a dictionary, a baseball bat, or maybe like Muslims strap a bomb to ourselves. We use the Bible because it is the truth, God's Truth, and just may one day what we try to help you to learn will sink in.

    15. dfbishopsr profile image59
      dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      If a 'person' stood before you and said, "I am God" would you believe him?
      Faith is the only way to know God. It is to the person of faith that He makes Himself known. The evidence of things not seen iare the things that are seen. Look at the intricate harmony of the human body, with it's seven systems and the dependence all seven have on each other. See photosynthesis and it's interaction with, and dependence on, human life, look at the heavens and say their majesty just happened: and we could go on and on and on, example after example, evidence after evidence Oh there can be dispute but the years have taught me that he who does not believe chooses so.

      1. A Troubled Man profile image59
        A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        LOL! None of those things are evidence for a gods existence. lol

        1. dfbishopsr profile image59
          dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          What do they tell you? Evolution? Happenstance? What? Surely when you look at the nature of things some thought, question, or opinion as to their origin enters into your mind - Speaking of mind, where do you suppose the reasoning mind comes from?

          1. Evolution Guy profile image59
            Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            LOLOLOLO Majik?

            Sorry you are incapable of reason.

            FSM dunnit - there is no other answer.

            RAmen

            1. dfbishopsr profile image59
              dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              It is a shame that  'derogatory' has to become your communication tool.

              1. Evolution Guy profile image59
                Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Sorry you are incapable of understanding.

                Jesus must be turning in his grave.

                I pity you.

          2. Cagsil profile image68
            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            The origins? If it wasn't for science determining how the Earth was formed and how evolution works, then there would be no explanation for why nature exists. But, since it does, we know.
            It comes from the left side of the brain, which was brought on by human consciousness(self awareness) and a need to understand the world around us.

            Why? Where do you think reasoning comes from? God? Not!

            1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Science also 'determined' that the Earth was flat, punishable by death if you didn't agree. That's science. You also answered the question with a question... "Why? Where do you think reasoning comes from? " How about giving it some thought instead? Also, if evolution is correct, where does the desire to love come from?

              1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
                MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this
                1. Zelkiiro profile image59
                  Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Love -> creates attachment between mates -> ensures more reproduction -> more babies -> species survives -> evolution successful!

              2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                No, that is an archaic belief from ancient civilizations, long before science. It was around 6th BC the Greeks began to conceive of a spherical earth using astronomy. That's science.

                1. Klush profile image58
                  Klushposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Science?? lol lol

                  1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                    A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    I'm glad science makes you happy. smile

              3. profile image0
                Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                No, that was Christianity.

                Evolution has not only given us love it's given most other mammals the same emotion. Without it we wouldn't survive because we wouldn't take care of our families. Love is actually been proven to be an addiction to affection.

                1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                  Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Galileo was imprisoned by the Inquisition and then lived the rest of his life under house arrest for suggesting the world wasn't flat. Yet the bible told us it was round long before we figured it out. The Bible also told us that air has weight and we should bury the dead and the washing of hands to avoid germs. something we didn't figure out until the 1800's!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

                  1. Zelkiiro profile image59
                    Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Burying the dead is superstitious nonsense that takes up way too much real estate. Cremation is far more sensible.

                  2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                    A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    But, the Bible didn't tell us the earth was spherical. Being round can still be two dimensional; ie. flat.



                    Show us the verses in the Bible that validate your claims.

                  3. profile image0
                    Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Yes the Inquisition.

                    ( the Inquisition ) an ecclesiastical tribunal established by Pope Gregory IX c. 1232 for the suppression of heresy. It was active chiefly in northern Italy and southern France, becoming notorious for the use of torture. In 1542 the papal Inquisition was re-established to combat Protestantism, eventually becoming an organ of papal government.

                    The church ordered Galileo to keep his finding of the earth not being the centre of the universe to himself or face death. The bible says nothing about a spherical earth. It talks about it's corners and pillars and a circle and it talks about the heaven being a dome over the earth.

                2. Michael-Milec profile image60
                  Michael-Milecposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Pardon me " evolution" you didn't give " us " love . LOVE, word translated from Greek ' agape ' which occures in Greek original New Testament, a word not found in Classic Greek, bu only in revealed religion. " agapaos " -to love indicate direction of the will and finding one's joy in something. Translated 'agape ' means benevolent love. It's benevolence, however  is not shown by doing what  the person loved desires, but what the one who loves deems as needed by the one loved. Clearly, my dear " science"  AGAPE- LOVE is owned and possessed by The God of the Universe the creator and sustainer even us humans. Himself in His nature of love GAVE not what man wanted, but what man needed as God perceived  man's need. Love is God's will directed toward man. But for man to show love of God he must first appropriate God's AGAPE, for only God has such unselfish love.
                  A statement above " without it ( love) we wouldn't survive" , is very correct  in a sencse that God is love and you know as all of us that without God there isn't life nor life's needs . Meanwhile in inter human relations and quite  recklessly used word  ' love ' is Greek word  " philia " denoting common interest, ( care for family ) , feelings emotions, affections ,etc.

                  1. profile image0
                    Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Please read a modern book. Love is an addiction to affection. When someone breaks up with you, you go through the same withdrawal an addict does, that why some young people take there own lives. It's a product of the brain and a result of evolution. No God required.

      2. Dave Mathews profile image59
        Dave Mathewsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        dfbishopsr: I am in agreeance with you, and since God is my Father and Jesus is my Brother I would recognize either or both in a heartbeat.

      3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
        Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        dfbishopsr, I like it.

    16. Titen-Sxull profile image71
      Titen-Sxullposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Well in a "THEOLOGICAL" discussion the Bible is the resource for Christians. Of course they are going to use it since it is the official scriptures of their faith and contains most of what they believe. Obviously it isn't evidence to us atheists and non-Christians but when it comes to matters of Faith most people aren't looking for evidence. In my experience most religious folks don't care that deeply about whether the beliefs are legitimately true and in some cases questioning those beliefs is an act shunned or even forbidden by those in 'authority'.

      When I was a Christian and went to church they often talked about having a "crisis of faith" which is basically where you have doubts or question God. Most of the time what they advised in this situation was praying away the doubt or "putting it in God's hands". In other words switch your brain off and just believe blindly.

      1. must65gt profile image83
        must65gtposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        In 2007, the attorney Frederick A. Larson produced a DVD entitled The Star of Bethlehem, in which he uses date mapping to establish evidence of the Christmas star.  http://www.bethlehemstar.net/ Then in December 2010 Dr. Danny Faulkner provided his findings offering other possibilities as to the validation of the facts presented by Larson ( http://www.answersingenesis.org/article … hlehem-dvd). Both contend their views are backed by scientific facts. Historians have used the bible to prove or disprove events in history as Biblical records provide the "Why" in explaining events in history when only the "who", "where" and "when" are provided. On more than one occasion archaeologist have discovered what is believed to be Noah’s Ark, when they returned to document their findings, it was not to be found. No facts may ever be found because God wants decisions to be on faith and faith alone.  Nowhere does the Bible state that it is anything but an explanation of Creation, a record of birth providing the lineage of King David from Abraham to the Birth of Christ (provable) Gods laws and the punishment for our disobedience; the prophecy and the fulfillment of those throughout history. Non-Christians will not believe in the Bible, God or his existence because it is contrary to the lifestyle they wish to adhere to. Christians use the Bible as their only recourse, because it offers the only irrefutable evidence they have to base their faith on. But the key point is faith itself. It is the evidence of things unseen, a concept non-believers cannot grasp. I would not try and convince someone God is real, because that is a choice that is made individually and cannot be forced. But I would also not allow someone to force me into believing God is not real. Ultimately time itself will prove who is right. I strongly believe my view is right, non-believes need to pray that I'm wrong.

    17. lizzieBoo profile image60
      lizzieBooposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Another thread to pillory Christians. Hooray!!

      1. Evolution Guy profile image59
        Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Awwww. How persekuted ur

        LOLOL

        1. lizzieBoo profile image60
          lizzieBooposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          you wish. xxx

        2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Can you add anything productive to these threads, other than bash and be defamatory? How old are you? Do you know what b"come let us reason together" means? (this would require reasoning to figure out).

    18. Don Crowson profile image59
      Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The scriptures that you refuse to believe are two witnesses. The Old Testament and the New Testament give their witness..  The Old Testament points to the coming of Christ and the New Testament declares that He has come and has risen. 

      And like any two witnesses of any event you may choose to believe or to reject what they say.  May I suggest that you read Psalm 22 that was written a thousand years before the crucifixion yet gives the perfect description. You may choose to believe it as real testimony or you may choose to believe that somehow many people conspired to make it all appear that Jesus is the Messiah. See, it is true or false because you believe the witnesses or you reject the witnesses.

      BTW this is just one instance of may.  You should do some more homework.

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        And maybe YOU should do some homework. lol

        1. Don Crowson profile image59
          Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Hey, I gave one example.  Many believers read this scripture and believe its witness.  You don't believe the witness. Nothing wrong with that. Therre are many other scriptures that you may accept or reject. But isn't that the difference between believers and nonbelievers.

          1. Cagsil profile image68
            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Like Jesus said- they know not what they do.
            Learn more about it before you talk about it. That's what should be done. And, quit worrying about what I believe. I've not once told you anything I believe, which is part and parcel your problem to begin with.
            I reject the entire religious book of the world, because each have been manipulated by man for reasons you refuse to understand.
            The difference is knowledge and wisdom, which is the difference. Those who choose to be ignorant with regards to knowledge and wisdom, make this world a more dangerous place to live in.

            1. Don Crowson profile image59
              Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              First of all, I don’t care what you believe.  That is not the subject of this thread. I simply pointed out what one Psalm said.  Many Christians believe it points to the crucifixion. Nowhere did I say you must accept it as total proof.  I simply asked you to look at what many Christians believe is evidence. That is the subject of the thread.

              And in your assertion that I need to learn more about it, you assume that I have not looked at both sides. And you further assume that if I had looked at both sides, I would agree with you because “each have been manipulated for reasons you refuse to understand.”  Great assumption when you do not state the reasons that I don’t understand.

              One does not choose to be ignorant when he/she looks at all sides of the argument.  He chooses to be ignorant when he/she refuses to look at one side or the other.

              1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
                MelissaBarrettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                This particular post, I agree with. (I've only read bits and pieces of other posts)

                1. Don Crowson profile image59
                  Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Melissa,  There is no reply button available on your post post below. No idea how to continue that topic, but when a person lives in a place where there is no communication, there are no food stamps and no  one to help that hungry person. And if that person is fed, there are no hungry people.

            2. annlynn9 profile image62
              annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Cagsill, people manipulate the civil law, medical knowledge, financial institutions, the internet, etc., etc. It is not those things which are wrong but people. Just so, people manipulate the Word of God. God is not wrong. People are. Another evidence of man's inherent nature to sin.

            3. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              "Learn more about it before you talk about it" - Practice what you preach?

        2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Reasoning?

      2. wilderness profile image76
        wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        As Cagsil says, perhaps you should do homework.   There is not one word of the crucifixion.  Nor of the Romans, Ceasar or Pilate.  Not of when or where it took place.  No indication someone died or who it was.

        Hardly a "perfect description" unless you want to count Jesus' quotation of a small bit of it.

        1. Don Crowson profile image59
          Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          As I have stated before, not everyone will believe the witness.  We all interpret different events and data in different ways.  Global warming is a farce to those who do not believe the evidence. The PSA test was great for testing for prostate cancer, but now some believe it is useless. Therefore, you may interpret one scripture as invalid.  But there are many more.  Have you investigated all of them?

    19. Tlherald85 profile image62
      Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Christians use the Bible in Theological Discussion because it is ALL they have to TRY to Prove their case to NON-believers. Which wouldn't be a problem IF they maybe just maybe went off the Bible as it was ORIGINALLY written. I don't believe someone who has NOT done their research on the bible in its originally written context ( the Hebrew language) should call themselves a Christian. When translated to English it was NOT FULLY translated properly. Do some research and you will find the accuracy of my statement. I am not here to fight or argue just to point out a fact. For example: Virgin as in the Virgin Mary. The hebrew word for Virgin is Almah the Hebrew Definiton is "a young woman of marriageable age". If that had meant the English definition of Virgin they would have used the word bethulah which means specifically OUR definition of Virgin. How about the saying "suffer a Witch not to live" hmmm once again translated incorrectly folks. Hebrew definition of the word is Thief! English Definition of the word is Use of Witchcraft, sorcery, magic, etc. So with that said. IF you want to argue the facts please people research them first. The English written Bible has SO many errors and INCORRECT definitions it is truly ridiculous.

      1. Don Crowson profile image59
        Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Interesting. Nowexplain why a young girl haviing a baby is so uncommon that we would recognize it as the Messiah being born?  We wouldn't.  Young girls have babies every day.  BTW I am aware of that interpretation of the term virgin.

        1. Tlherald85 profile image62
          Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          That's the point. WHY did they think it was Messiah?? Why was it SO important?? Or was it?? From the research I have done Miss "Virgin" Mary was NOT even CLOSE to being a "virgin" the english definition of "virgin" that is. NOT even close. And its in history books at the library. It's sad really.

          1. annlynn9 profile image62
            annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            When the angel told Mary of the child she was to have, she asked "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" [Luke 1:34] In King James English, the verb "know" was used to indicate not merely being acquainted with someone but having an intimate relationship. Going back to Genesis, the "knowing" is very clear: "Adam knew his wife Eve, and she conceived." [Genesis 4:1] But Mary knew NOT a man. Surely, Mary did not grow up without ever meeting a single man.

            As to Jesus being recognized as the Messiah, John the Baptist got a clue while he was in prison, by hearing about the things Jesus was doing. He sent two of his followers to ask Jesus, "Are you he that should come, or do we look for another?" Jesus replied: "Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see: The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them." [Matthew 11:2-5]. Here, Jesus was referring to two of Isaiah's prophecies about the coming of the Messiah: (1) "The eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing" [35:5-6]; (2) "the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek" [61:1], The word "gospel" in King James meant "good news", but it's been adopted now to mean specifically the message concerning Christ, the kingdom of God, and salvation.

          2. profile image0
            Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I'm sorry, but I have to ask. Other than the words written in the Bible, how much research can you do on the figure of Mary?

            1. DoubleScorpion profile image77
              DoubleScorpionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              There are other texts that never made it into the bible that covers things along these lines.

              Are they authentic? That is debatable, but some were written in the same timeframe as the biblical texts.

              1. profile image0
                Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Do they say Mary was a floozie? I'm curious.

                1. DoubleScorpion profile image77
                  DoubleScorpionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Some do imply that she was other than portrayed in the bible. I wouldn't say a floozie, but not a virgin (single girl of marriage age). Same for Jesus, he was portrayed abit on the violent side and not always so loving and forgiving.

                  1. profile image0
                    Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    You know, I’ve read some of the ‘accounts’ of Jesus as a child. It’s funny, because you don’t know what to do with all of it. Are the gospels true?  Are any of the other writings true? If you believe one, why not the other?

                    It would be very helpful to know who wrote what, outside of the NT. What motivated them to write it? When was it written? What relationship did they have with the early Christians?

                    I see it all, top to bottom, as just a question of what you want to believe. I could be wrong. But, it seems like we have collected enough information and /or dis-information  to believe anything we want; we can’t verify anything. So we run with whatever works for us.

                    I’d love to know the facts.

      2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
        Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Tlherald85. Lady you brought an interesting topic. I am student and now teacher of Bible for about 60 years. I read and listen Hebrew Bible as well. There is nothing wrong with the Bible. What is wrong is understanding. Yes, Virgin translation as you point out is young woman. But it is not the point. Mary was virgin and I will tell you why. God said to woman and Serpent there will be enmity between you two. It said that woman seed not man seed will crash the Satan skull. See the man sperm is genetic transferring of blood of child. The same time is transferring genetically chromosome of sin. The Messiah cannot be both parents son since he would be unable to defeat Satan who became master of the world. See here is the point. She was virgin also from other reason. The required to be virgin otherwise she would be stoned if husband will find he was deceived. In my past practice in Europe there was almost all virgins in Mary's age. America is different now.
        The second point is that Bible is written not in analog, but in digital mode. It is unchangeable. God and His Word is unchangeable even not understood. It is not scientific book but important message for salvation and victory life. We have now about 50 translation of Bible. Student may check and compare and knowledge is increasing as predicted. I do not have time to explain to you in details all. But there are two factors we forget it and it is faith and love. That's all what man needs and God demands.

        1. Tlherald85 profile image62
          Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I do not disagree with you. I do disagree with the misrepresentations most use of the bible. I believe Faith is important and you find faith within yourself. It is PERSONAL. And shouldn't be based on a "book" whether it be holy or not.
          My problem is I have done TONS of research attended multiple different churches and realized that yes tyhe bible does contain some fact and truth BUT it has been rewritten so many times and translated so many times that SO much has been lost, misinterpreted, translate incorrectly, etc. I met ONE preacher in my lifetime that actually took the time to do the FULL research and preached in HIS church facts. I loved it. He never stated most of the things that are taught in the common church. He did NOT just READ from the bible and say this is how it is. He would read from the bible yes BUT he also helped people to UNDERSTAND what it ACTUALLY meant. And even spoke of the wrong translations and tols people how it SHOULD have been translated. He was a very close friend of mine. Very open-minded, loving and caring. Which a lot of Christians are NOT these days. I am very open-minded and NOT judgemental at all. I do not believe it is OUR place as mear humans to judge one another.

          1. annlynn9 profile image62
            annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Your experience is not so different from mine. You've done tons of research and attended multiple different churches, and so have I. You've met one preacher that took the time to do "full" research and preached facts, and I've met several preachers who did research both in and outside the Bible (one of them has a library containing hundreds of books), and they preach truth. They've studied both Greek and Hebrew, and they read from the Bible and tell you what they believe it means, but they also tell you to read the scriptures for yourself and to pray for understanding from God. Your friend is very open-minded, loving, and caring, and so are the men of whom I speak.

            No, we are not to judge one another, but what does that mean? It doesn't mean you can't say a person's words or actions are wrong. It only means you can't say whether they are going to heaven or hell. That is for God alone to pronounce. He is the Judge of men's souls, but we are to discern between good and evil.

    20. mosaicman profile image58
      mosaicmanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Many atheists use science in the discussion as to why God is not real etc. Both sides of the discussion are like night and day. We are thinking spiritually and others are thinking Carnally.

      1. earnestshub profile image70
        earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Science too sexy for you?smile

    21. rwburns3rd profile image60
      rwburns3rdposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Let me just be clear on your question.  You're asking why do people who follow Christ use the book(s) that's written about him as evidence of him?  I don't know that seems like a common sense answer to me.  Then to even further I guess disqualify your question you add the phrase "theological discussion."  So you want to "discuss" Christianity and want theological evidenced other than the book written about it.  Good luck with that. 
      Here's what the question sounds like.  "Why do scientists keep trying to convince me what the core of the earth looks like and is made out of using science books and no one has ever been there or seen it?"  Its because thats what they believe based off what they know.  It's their best guess.  People who follow Christ follow him based off what they know and what they believe.  If you don't believe it thats fine its your decision.  But here is the difference.  If we are wrong about Christianity and we die.....so what?  But lets say you're wrong and there is a God and heaven and hell.....so what?  I think you know the answer.  Which odds would you rather take?

      1. profile image51
        Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        That's called Pascal's Wager and its by far the weakest reasoning for belief in God in Philosophy.

        1. annlynn9 profile image62
          annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          The so-called Pascal's Wager is not a reason to believe, it's just a challenge.

        2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          You ignored the entire post and only ridiculed the very last point - nice smile

          1. profile image0
            Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Then there's the lion and the tiger from different parts of the world, but still able to produce offspring.

            Let's not forget the horse, donkey and zebra.

            Oh and there's the E. coli long-term evolution experiment.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_lo … experiment

      2. Tlherald85 profile image62
        Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Exactly, who cares were all gonna die and find out eventually.

        I'm sorry but personally I don't believe in the "man-made" satan/devil or in anyplace called HELL. Even those who have close encounters with death NEVER say 2 words of NO such place. The most I have heard of that is in the bilbe. Which is not trustworthy in my own personal opinion anyway.

    22. rwburns3rd profile image60
      rwburns3rdposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Here's a better question for you.  How many times has math and science been proven WRONG?  So called already "proven" math and science.  Math itself calls most of its ideas Theorems! 

      Now in contrast give me an example when Christianity has been PROVEN wrong.

      1. profile image51
        Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Well, men don't come back from the dead for one thing.
        Oceans don't part.
        You obviously can't house every animal today on a boat.
        People don't live to be over 900 years old.

        I can give you more

        1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
          Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          ..It would be all according to mans understanding, and mans knowledge.

          God asks that you accept His, big ask ,but then again ,not really wink

        2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Men don't come back from the dead - https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=ch … mp;bih=707
          Oceans don't part - you're right, God parts them.
          Every Animal - it wasn't 'every' animal, it was 2 of every unclean and 7 of every clean. At least read the book you disagree with.
          People don't live to be 900 years old - but they used to. .. http://www.apologeticspress.org/APConte … rticle=681

          1. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Even though the title of that article is, "The Bible, Science, and the Ages of the Patriarchs" there is no science in the body of work or in any of the references cited other than a minor article from a pop-sci magazine.

            It mostly talks about what the Bible says. Rubbish.

            There is plenty of evidence to understand folks had pretty short life spans back then. Claims of living hundreds of years is just another half-baked fantasy.

            1. Zelkiiro profile image59
              Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Don't you find it fairly suspicious that people stop living for hundreds of years after the books of Moses?

              1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Up until the flood the common diet was fruits, nuts, veggies and grain, after the flood meat eating increased due to lack of vegetation... and yes, interesting how this decreased the life-span wink

            2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Ha ha - classic atheist defense. Everything we produce as evidence is 'biased' right?

              http://www.inplainsite.org/html/methuse … long_.html

              1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                No one said that, but certainly that article was rubbish.



                More rubbish.

                1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                  Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  The bottom line, as stated before is quite simple. There are two choices - God, or evolution. Evolution has been proven 'scientifically' impossible - now what? It does not matter if you understand the Bible or how you interpret the Bible. It does not matter how you translate the Bible, the fact remains. Therefore, it is not up to Christians to 'prove' the Bible, it is up to atheists to disprove it. Many men throughout history, greater men than you or I, have tried... and failed. Just saying you do not believe oceans part, or people resurrect from the dead, or a 'fairy-tale' God, is not evidence in any form that the Bible is wrong smile
                  https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=ch … mp;bih=707

                  1. JMcFarland profile image69
                    JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    shifting of the burden of proof.  There are plenty of Biblical Scholars out there with degrees in history and biblical literature that have pointed out the flaws in the bible more than adequately.

                  2. MelissaBarrett profile image59
                    MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    There are more than two choices.

                    There's an infinite number of ways that things could have gone down to get us here...

                    Evolution/Big Bang (Which are two completely separate theories answering two completely separate questions) are two choices.  Either one is compatible with believing in a God to modern Christians.

                    If you bring other religions into it, the list of possibilities just grows.

                    Black and white thought processes are signs of a rigid indoctrinated mind.

          2. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Actually, the Red Sea does part. This is an actual, though rare, weather phenomena where the Red Sea, which in some places is very shallow, has been held back by a strong wind, not unlike the actual description in Genesis.

      2. Tlherald85 profile image62
        Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this
    23. ediggity profile image60
      ediggityposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Why wouldn't a Christian use the BIBLE as evidence to support their belief in a Theological discussion?  Do you not understand what Theology is?

      1. DoubleScorpion profile image77
        DoubleScorpionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        the·ol·o·gy   /θiˈɒlədʒi/  Show Spelled[thee-ol-uh-jee]  Show IPA
        noun, plural -gies. 
        1. the field of study and analysis that treats of God and of God's attributes and relations to the universe; study of divine things or religious truth; divinity.
        2. a particular form, system, branch, or course of this study.


        Nothing here about a bible or other texts.

        1. ediggity profile image60
          ediggityposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          That's interesting, how does one study something without a source to study from?  I stand by my original statements.

          Here's the Merriam Webster definition:

          http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theology


          the·ol·o·gy noun \thē-ˈä-lə-jē\
          plural the·ol·o·gies



          Definition of THEOLOGY

          1
          : the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world
          2
          a : a theological theory or system <Thomist theology> <a theology of atonement>
          b : a distinctive body of theological opinion <Catholic theology>
          3
          : a usually 4-year course of specialized religious training in a Roman Catholic major seminary
          See theology defined for English-language learners »
          See theology defined for kids »


          Why wouldn't a Christian use the BIBLE as evidence to support their belief in a Theological discussion?  Do you not understand what Theology is?

          1. recommend1 profile image58
            recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Scorpion TOLD you already what the definition is - and your quoting from a different source gave you the same answer - NEITHER MENTIONS THE BIBLE as an element of that study.

            I sometimes wonder at the intelligence level in these threads !

            1. ediggity profile image60
              ediggityposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Again I state, Why wouldn't a Christian use the BIBLE as evidence to support their belief in a Theological discussion?  Do you not understand what Theology is?  I often wonder the same thing you do ( except I wonder about, not at - insert irony here), especially when the discussion is outlined by a definition.  smile

          2. DoubleScorpion profile image77
            DoubleScorpionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Theology and Biblical studies are two different things. Theology can be based on any doctrine or dogma writing and is not limited to a bible. Theology covers more than just christian teachings. That is what many do not understand. And if someone has no belief in a certain text, then attempting to use it to support your theological theory is pointless. One can present a theological theory using a multitude of sources. The problem is with most of the amateur Christians theologist, they only know the one source.

            And yes I know what Theology is quite well.

            1. ediggity profile image60
              ediggityposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              I realize there are more sources to consider during a Theological discussion.  Again I state, in congruence with the title of the thread, Why wouldn't a Christian use the BIBLE as evidence to support their belief in a Theological discussion?

              1. DoubleScorpion profile image77
                DoubleScorpionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Because if the person you are talking with does not view the bible as a creditable source, then one has to use something else to support their side of the debate. Christians tend to use the bible, because it is the only source they know. When discussing theology, there are many other sources, besides the bible which can be used that is deemed as reliable by both parties of the debate.
                One cannot prove a point to an opposing party, if the document used is not regarded as factual by both parties.
                So for a christian to use the bible, which the majority of atheists feel is mythological stories, would be completely pointless in attempting to prove thier side of the debate.
                If I was attempting to prove the theology of Greek Pagan beliefs and only used the Greek myth stories as my proof, you wouldn't regard my side as holding much water now would you? Be honest...It is the same when discussing Christian theology. Use a source or evidence that both parties see as factual.

                1. ediggity profile image60
                  ediggityposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  You can use whatever sources you want to prove your side of the debate.  It's not science, it's debating.  Unless constraints are set prior to the debate then all sources are fair game. Additionally, the OP never even referred to debating, only discussion.

                  I stand by my original statement:

                  Why wouldn't a Christian use the BIBLE as evidence to support their belief in a Theological discussion?

                  1. DoubleScorpion profile image77
                    DoubleScorpionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Your points are about arguing the validity of the bible, not theology.
                    The majority of debates is arguing the facts and the interpretation of those facts. Both parties have to agree on what is fact though.

                    And my point about christian TEND to use the bible, still holds true. This includes most, but not all.
                    Ask a christian where they get their "facts" from. Then ask them to name other documents that support might also support their "facts". The mojority will tell you that they need nothing but the bible (because it is the word of God), and all other documents are pretty much useless (if it was supported by God, it would be in the bible).

                    People who debate abortion? Let's see the bible is used, statistics are used and a whole lot of personal opinion is used.

                    Not even all Christians agree on the bible. Which is why there are so many denominations of Christianity.

                    So far you have shown nothing that supports a valid debate/discussion on theology, you are, however attempting to valid the bible, which is not required for a theological discussion or debate. Which is the point behind the OP. If a Christian truly knows the theology behind their beliefs, then the bible is not required for them to discuss the topic using sources that both parties deem as factual.
                    I would venture to guess that most Christians don't even know the background or history behind the bible we see today.
                    And it has been proven through studies that the Atheist/Agnostic know and understand more about the Bible and Christian beliefs than the Christians do.

    24. preacherdon profile image66
      preacherdonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The same could be said of Nietzsche or any other philosopher. Why do people use the writings of Nietzsche to philosphies? They do so because it is a recognized source. So, is the Bible. Anyone could write a book and say these are the newly diiscovered writings of Nietzsche. After all, how could it be disputed without comparing it to other authenticated writing from him.

      1. ediggity profile image60
        ediggityposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Well said.  smile

    25. shop online fast profile image60
      shop online fastposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      everything, that we believe, falls under one of the categories below:

      (1)  evidences (physical)
      (2)  teachings (schools / readings / tv's)
      (3)  personal experiences (see / hear / feel / touch / smell)
      (4)  dreams
      (4)  encounter with a spiritual being

      overtime, we will not recall or remember things clearly, so we record them for future reference (usually in a book)

      just like the psychiatrist has a book of codes that he goes by, and the lawyer has a book of laws that he goes by, the religious man also has a book that he goes by, called the bible

      if the doctor uses a book to practice his medicine, then he should believe what's in the book (whether it's right or wrong)

      likewise, what ever bible the religious man uses, he should believe the words are true: and hold it as the truth. otherwise, there would be no point in having a bible, or believing in it

      but, remember, we all believe something, or in something. 

      equally, we all disbelieve in anything that contradicts our belief.

      1. Evolution Guy profile image59
        Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        So what you are saying is - your majikal, spiritual "experiences" are no less valid than people who measure actual reality - and it is the same? lol

        Dreams iz the same as reality - therefore believing garbage is the same as believing things that can be measured.

        Just remember - not all of us need to believe nonsense because we are scared.

        1. shop online fast profile image60
          shop online fastposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          how are you evolution guy?

          what i'm saying is that every human being, who is of age (7 and up), believes in something, real or imagine.

          we only believe bases on certain factors.  a dream can influence our belief.  a revelation, or a spiritual encounter from our Maker can influence our belief.

          you don't have to be able to prove or measure something to believe in it.  a Fact, on the other hand, has to be measured and proven. 

          also,  you are supporting my argument when you say, and i quote: "Just remember - not all of us need to believe nonsense because we are scared."

          we all believe in something.  at the same time, we all disbelieve other things.  in other words, none of us believes everything we hear or read.

        2. annlynn9 profile image62
          annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I'm just wondering about the credentials of anyone here who believes there is no God and science somehow proves it. Here are the views of some noted physicists and other scientists.

          Oxford physicist Roger Penrose [born 1931] believes that mathematics suggests there is a world beyond the immediate, material one.
          BBC News Magazine: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7955846.stm

          John Polkinghorne [born 1930], quantum physicist and now Anglican Minister, says the ordered universe which science reveals is only what you’d expect if it was made by an orderly God. He calls science and religion “intellectual cousins”.
          “Belief in God in an Age of Science”, Yale University Press (2003); http://biologos.org/resources/belief-in … of-science

          Physics professor Henry Margenau [1901-1997] wrote: “... there exists a wide-spread view that regards science and religion in general as incompatible. Let me therefore point out, first of all, that this belief may have been held true half a century ago but has now lost its validity, as may be seen by anyone who reads the philosophical writings of the most distinguished and creative physicists of the last five decades. I am referring here to men like Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schroedinger, Dirac, Wigner and many others.”
          http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth16.html

          As inferred by Margenau, it is only in the latter half of the 20th century that science has been viewed by so many people as an argument against religion. Following are noted scientists of the previous five centuries and their views and/or positions:

          Astronomer Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) was also a Canon in the Catholic church.

          Mathematician and astronomer Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity.

          Even Galileo (1564-1642) expressly said that the Bible cannot err and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.

          Isaac Newton (1642-1727), whose scientific knowledge and endeavors spanned numerous fields of science, held in his system of physics that God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space.

          Michael Faraday (1791-1867), whose work revolutionized physics, was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, an offshoot of Presbyterianism.

          William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907), whose work helped lay the groundwork for modern physics, was an “old Earth creationist”, meaning he estimated the Earth to have been created by God somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years.

          Max Planck (1858-1947), a physicist best known for quantum theory, expressed in his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft” the view that God is everywhere present. He also said in his lecture that:
          (1) "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols.”
          (2) "Religion and science are not mutually exclusive, as some now believe, or fear, but they are complementary and interdependent.”
          (3) "It is the constantly ongoing, never-flagging fight against skepticism and dogmatism, against disbelief and superstition, in which religion and science are jointly struggling, and the pioneering slogan for this struggle is always, Towards God! "

          Finally, here is what Dr. Francis Collins of the National Human Genome Research Institute has to say having tried to prove that his atheist position was correct:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml0FqyFYfrU

          1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
            Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            annlynn9, Thank you for this review piece.

            1. annlynn9 profile image62
              annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              You're welcome Vladimir.

          2. OutWest profile image56
            OutWestposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Here's another.  Pascal. 
            "Pascal had an intense religious vision and immediately recorded the experience in a brief note to himself"
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaise_Pascal

            1. annlynn9 profile image62
              annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Thanks!

          3. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
            Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Very well done annlynn9. Sincerest kudos to you. FTW!!!!  ha ha ha lol. Love it!

      2. A Troubled Man profile image59
        A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        That has never occurred because spirits don't exist.



        Yes, but some believe what reality offers while some don't and have chosen fantasy and magic.



        It would appear you don't.

        1. OutWest profile image56
          OutWestposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          And how can you be so sure?

        2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Anything you can add to annlynn9's post?

          1. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            It is obvious Andy is merely regurgitating all the usual creationist garbage that has been going round the internet, laughed and ridiculed at because it is so ridiculous.

            Are you sure you're not Ken Ham? lol

    26. Dave Mathews profile image59
      Dave Mathewsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      What would you have them use, a deck of Taroh Cards, a crystal ball, obviously they use the one tool, the bible to better illustrate their point they are trying to make. The fact that you do not share a belief in their choice of reference text, does not make it any less credible as documentation of the truth and the facts. If you will not even accept the possibility that they present the truth, then you are very closed minded.

      1. profile image51
        Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        I've considered the possibility and concluded that it is not possible. Funny you call the atheist closed minded though haha

        1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          You may conclude anything you wish - that in of itself does not mean it's not true smile

          1. JMcFarland profile image69
            JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            show me an actual, scientific paper that proves evolution wrong.  A blog post from "icr" isn't going to cut it.

            1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              My friend, do you know what the R in ICR stands for? It stands for 'research' - I figured if you were too lazy to do it yourself you could click on it. But there you go again - all Christian evidence is biased, right? Lol. 32 million hits are NOT all from blog posts and youtube. On the contrary, many are from 'scientists'  That's why many scientist today have become creationists, not the other way around. The evidence is undeniable and the honest person has no choice but to concede. wink

              1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Yes, you are not conceding to the overwhelming evidence of evolution.

    27. emrldphx profile image60
      emrldphxposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The reason they use it as evidence, is because the subject of theology is a personal one. There is no empirical method of testing whether or not God exists, so it is left to the realm of reasoning and personal experience.

      People quote the bible because it is something that makes sense and feels right to them. It is no different than your opinion that the bible isn't true...

    28. MetAlex profile image60
      MetAlexposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Because they usually haven't thought of a world outside of what they "know" is true. It is hard for them to consider that the bible is false because they have "known" it to be truthful for so long. This isn't really their fault, in fact I don't even blame them. It's hard to suddenly take something you've always "known" to be true and question it's truthfulness. In their world, the bible is indisputable, so its the first solid evidence they can think of.

    29. profile image0
      Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      There is a slight difference between a theological discussion and a religious discussion. Typically, a theological discussion is had between two believers and as such the Bible is used as the reference tool in the discussion as it is the tool that is being discussed.


      In a religious discussion, You are dealing with more than one specific religion (or non religion out of respect to my atheist friends). In this case, A believer uses the reference tool of his/her religion to get their point across..

      Now in a religious vs atheist debate, A lot of believers use the Bible as a weapon to speak on the evils of nonbelievers. Which in itself is stupid (even I agree to that) since you don't believe

    30. profile image0
      Rad Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That's what the mormons did.

      1. profile image0
        Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        WOW!! I totally agree with this one!

    31. alexabda profile image61
      alexabdaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well, it is obvious. Because it is the bible itself that they are trying to persuade you to believe in. You are not supposed to believe or worship any god or gods otherwise, outside of the bible. The trick is, once you give up, you are lured into believing you are supposed, as a good Christian, to believe and adopt many other things also set forth therein.

      THERE IS NO OR VERY LITTLE POINT OR SENSE DISCUSSING A GOD OR ITS EXISTENCE ON A BASIS OTHER THAN BIBLE. ONE CAN JUST MAKE SUPPOSITIONS RATHER THAN CONCLUSIONS, GO INTO PARABLES RATHER THAN ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES AND CASES, OFFER ARGUMENTS RATHER THAN EVIDENCE. MORE, EVEN IF ONE ACCEPT THAT A GOD EXISTS, IT IS YET NECESARY TO DECIDE WHAT RELATION CAN EXIST BETWEEN HIM AND ME, IF ANY.

    32. alexabda profile image61
      alexabdaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I started from an atheistic family. After the collapse of the USSR, everybody rashed into some sort of religion, cult or worship. I began to believe under the influence of my uncle, a Christian. But after many years of reading the bible, looking into it and trying to understand what it says, I have converted into a theist with strong signs of atheism. JUST BECAUSE THE BIBLE DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. Neither Judaism, nor Christianity. Nor Islam. After years of personal research, I came to a conclusion that this is a road to nowhere. Any other roads may also lead to some doubtful places, but does it really make difference?

    33. alexabda profile image61
      alexabdaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      As a matter of fact, it is all about the fear of death. People are afraid of dying because their death can turn out to be the end. Full stop. No further existence in any form.

      Basically, if one's personal life continues after the death, this must be a natural process. Regardless of whether I believe it or not. This world has proved to be something different than Matrix, a world of illusions. One's postmortal existence has nothing to do with one's belief in that existence. Either way, such continuation must be natural, automatic, as anything else in this world.

      Correspondingly, if no further life exists, no belief or faith or aspirations would create it or bring to existence. One just dies. That's it.

      Finally, as long as the Christian doctrine is held true, YHWH is supposed to grant salvation, whether that means the forgiveness of sins or eternal life and one hundred times more houses and wives. It is a gift they say. God's grace and love. The system must work just like in the case of Adam - one man sinned, everybody dies. One man died, everybody is forgiven and lives. OTHERWISE THIS IS BUT BULLSHIT.

    34. alexabda profile image61
      alexabdaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      When I say that I am an atheistic theist I mean that I admit the existence of a god, but I also hold that the god whose existence I admit is not necessarily the one mentioned in the bible. If fact, the bible made me a disbeliever. I cannot believe inthe desribed in that book, and basically in any other book. If the hypothetical god's name is eventually proved to be Zeus, I will just adhere to that. The rest is senseless.

    35. Silverspeeder profile image61
      Silverspeederposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Darwin created a book that evolution theorists use as evidence that evolution happened yet there is no evidence to the fact that it did.

      1. profile image0
        Rad Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        The evidence is over whelming,

      2. A Troubled Man profile image59
        A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        One would have to have been hiding under a rock the last 150 years to believe that. lol

      3. Zelkiiro profile image59
        Zelkiiroposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Quick! What's a "ring species"?

      4. profile image0
        Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        The books and the fact that other scientists continued to test those theories are the evidence that evolution happened and is still happening.

      5. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
        Vladimir Uhriposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        87
        Silverspeeder I like it. There is no evidence and never will be.

        1. A Troubled Man profile image59
          A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Hey Deepes, what do you think about this? Are these honest answers? Are they worthy of respect?

          1. profile image0
            Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Well, They could very well be honest answers based on their understanding (or lack thereof) of evolution. I personally would not (and did not) ridicule them for their statements because I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they honestly did not know. That is why I tried to correct them somewhat. I can't fault them totally for what they might not have honestly known, but on the other hand still would warn them against speaking with confidence things they may not have studied or had full understanding of..

            Now if they were to still assert this while stating that they did and have studied evolution, then I might have a different mind about it. Not necessarily a disrespectful mind, but still a mmind to tell them to go back and study it again

            1. profile image0
              Rad Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Ignorance is only an excuse if your attempting to learn something. They think they know.

              http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2012/bact … -0405.html

              http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/ … earn-math/

              1. Soul Man Dancing profile image60
                Soul Man Dancingposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Sorry, I don't follow links on HubPages. It is a good way to pick up a hitch hiker or malware.

              2. profile image0
                Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                I see your point Rad. I didn't say I specifically excuse their ignorance.. The fact that I tried to correct (for me) shows that. If I excused it Even remotely, I wouldn't have tried to correct them. I would have left them blissfully unaware

            2. A Troubled Man profile image59
              A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              They have no understanding of evolution, but are openly denouncing evolution, that is not honest by any stretch of the imagination, quite the contrary. They are claiming there is "no evidence" when in fact there are mountains of evidence, and they know that. They are saying those things because they've been indoctrinated to say those things. That is the dishonesty the religion teaches them, to openly denounce facts and evidence.



              They do know there is evidence, but they dishonestly will state otherwise. There is no benefit of the doubt here.



              You can try and correct them, educate them till the cows come home, and they will through everything right back in your face, denying and rejecting everything you say. willingly and dishonestly.



              They are NOT saying they don't know, they are rejecting evolution outright by claiming there is no evidence, but they know there is evidence, lots of it.



              That will do nothing, they will continue the onslaught of denial and rejection, regardless.



              The won't study it, they will keep denying and rejecting, no matter what. That is what their religion teaches them to do, deny and reject facts.

              It's called dishonesty.

              1. profile image0
                Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Out of curiosity, do you hold this opinion of anyone? The idea that they reject what they do not know or understand as nonsense is just totally dishonest? Or does this just apply to believers? Also, are you asserting that religion simply teaches people to ignore and reject facts?

                1. Soul Man Dancing profile image60
                  Soul Man Dancingposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  You have to ask?

                  1. profile image0
                    Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    Yes I have to ask because if I formulate my own conclusions without seeking clarification then I will be guilty of what ATM accuses believers of doing which is to reject any reason or logic in the face of our own potentially unfounded beliefs

                2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Obviously, it applies to anyone who would openly deny or reject it without knowing anything about it, those who are dishonest. So far, we have only observed believers, especially the ones who will reject and deny many other facts and evidence about the world around us.



                  The problem is that religion teaches good people to say and do bad things, rejecting facts is just one of them.

                  1. profile image0
                    Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    Thank you for your answers.. But since you are only observing believers, Wouldn't that make your observations a little sketchy and biased (at best)?

                    I agree with your assessment of the problem

                  2. profile image0
                    Deepes Mindposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    This is where I got the notion. But I must have misread this response from you.

              2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                32,100,000 hits seem to disagree with there being evidence of evolution smile

                1. JMcFarland profile image69
                  JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  you do realize that actual science isn't dependent on the number of hits from a blog posting or youtube video, right?  Scientists have journals for that stuff, and none of those journals seem to care much for "hits" or would-be apologist mockery.

                  1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                    Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    lol - nice way to avoid the truth.

    36. profile image0
      Mklow1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      From what I've seen, when someone sites scriptures, it is to show why and what they believe, not to prove to others that they should believe. Granted it is a fine line, but it is a difference.

    37. profile image58
      chevyssbowtieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Obviously if i'm an atheist and I don't believe in your God, why would I take your scriptures as evidence? That doesn't make any sense.

      Your exactly right that's why I as a Christian don't waste my time talking to people who just wont believe. and other Christians ought to do the same.

    38. tsmog profile image82
      tsmogposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The question is, "Why do Christians use the Bible as evidence in Theological discussions?"

      The answer is for today simply that is what most have been taught generally speaking. This individual uses that terminology based on inferential thought as with singularity is of discussion and, too, the usage of "Christians" as plural. Specifics of the generalized term "Christians" could be the old saying;

      "You, of which is singularity, can please some, of which is plural, of the people, which is inclusive of all, all the time, (note: Comma usage) all, which is nonexclusive, of the people, which is plural, some, of which is nonspecific, of the time, which is a measure unspecified, but, which is a conjunction, you, which is singularity, can not please all, which is nonexclusive, of the people, which is plural, all the time," of which is an unspecified measure.

      The antithesis rings true as well. Bear in mind the subject and the verbiage. Consider common logic and/or knowledge to people as specifics were not mentioned as, too, is the plural term used of an object, being Christian, of which, again, is not specific, becoming a matter of common regarding knowledge and logic. Forget about emotional appeal, since the question does not bear emotion within it. Ethics is based on morals and that is not the question asked.



      The forum author both asks and states this, Obviously if i'm an atheist and I don't believe in your God, why would I take your scriptures as evidence? That doesn't make any sense.

      [i]You are absolutely correct.[i/] Again sound logic with common principals offering both, with not oddity, deductive and inductive reasoning. However, that statement written as a question has not any dealing with the first proposed. It is a distraction of the question creating emotion of an appeal and by this individual is denied of argument, simple enough.

      The author of this forum states, not questions, this, "Not to mention the bible has this nasty ideal that everything in it is true because God said its true."

      Answering this question proposed slyly with wit, as a statement, I will say I am on rocky soil, since it bears on memory. If I hear you correctly it is the Bible as a text, at question, of which is comprised of both context and content, that is considered said by God? I apologize to you with both honor and regret. My memory at times is of fault. For this argumentative discussion to continue further could you please be specific where upon that book of literature it declares this.

      My vague memory remembers only of those books in that bible where upon God Said something or another. All the rest based again on my vague memory is from a man of God, and not God as an entity. The new testament repeats in narration the old testament,therefore unsound reasoning. Christ was a man and not a God. So null set there.

      Okay, you get a gimme. Throw out the Book of Genesis where it records "God Said" and lets continue the argument of Theological Discussion. Bear in mind Theology. And, to I give you the right to be an atheist without hindrance while allowing for Darwinian thought as the foundation of life.

      Okay, now discuss Theology. Your Turn! There no longer is a foundation for Christianity as being from lineage of man and of god. Simply it no longer exists. Which theology do we now discuss?

      Here is a statement by the author of the forum question, yet not being of witness to the act, I must believe it as so that the author wrote this statement, "If it were that simple, everyone could publish a book and say God said everything is true and if you don't believe it you're going to Hell.'

      No argument on your part. That statement is the null set and voided. You are now discussing belief without any foundation presented as a definition of what belief is. Hell doesn't count since we threw out creation with Genesis so you can not go there. And, too, since we threw out Genesis, why can 't I say am I God. Come on now. The book of Genesis is non existent. There is no longer an authoritative figure much less a head. God does not exist without Genesis, right? Therefore I proclaim I am God. Argue that point, please? Yes, God is little ol' me . . . Next, question?

      P.S. Yes, society and medicine considers me in the slang term as crazy. Or, with psychology it is termed I am diagnosed with Bipolar disorder and that falls into a category of Abnormal Psychology. Or, in jest, Yes, I am crazy, I have a psychiatrist who can not deny the diagnosis at this time, and rhetorically I have papers to prove it. So, what is your excuse? Why not since god no longer exists with the book of genesis tossed in the heap do you not proclaim you are God?

      I did and I am still alive! No harm, no foul it seems. Does that mean there is forgiveness? Where the hell does does forgiveness come from any way? Jesus is just a simpleton. So, nope do not even think of going there for help. Ask your buddy next to you where ever you are. However, asks him where he gets the power to forgive you? Ponder power. Oopps, there is no hell. Where in St Paul, MN. does that come from. Oopps. No Saints, remember. Okay, the constitution and the other documents no longer have any iota of authority. We threw out the book of genesis. What now? I'm stuck. Probably eat dinner or something like that.

      You, Mr. Author of this forum asked to discuss theology. Go for it!

      Everyone else remember to smile and have fun, fun, fun . . . . . . doing what ever.

    39. Chris Neal profile image76
      Chris Nealposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah, but it's not that simple, is it? Christianity didn't just willy-nilly start saying that. There's a large and solid body of research and thought about it.

      The fact that so many books written across so many thousands of years agree with each other so well about God is definitely one sign.

      1. JMcFarland profile image69
        JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Except, of course, for the fact that they don't.  At all.

        1. profile image0
          Deepes Mindposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Sure they do.. They all agree that God is real

          1. JMcFarland profile image69
            JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Sure, you're right.  But that's about where the similarities end.

            1. profile image0
              Deepes Mindposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Also that the Bible is His word. and the way to salvation is faith and belief in Christ..

              You know.. the basic fundamentals..

              1. JMcFarland profile image69
                JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Not true.  Most of the books do not claim to be scripture at all, and Jesus is absent from the old testament.

                1. profile image0
                  Deepes Mindposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  True, But the books that Chris is referring to weren't just the books of the Bible. He was also talking about other Christian books that have been written throughout the years by Scholars that have researched the bible.

                  1. JMcFarland profile image69
                    JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    And for every Christian biblical scholar I can point to a secular one to disagree with then.  Its an appeal to authority

        2. Chris Neal profile image76
          Chris Nealposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Except of course, that they do. Totally.

          Gee, this is a fun game. I certainly never get tired of playing it with ATM.

          1. JMcFarland profile image69
            JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            yeah, and I never get tired of being compared with other atheists when you know that I'm capable of perfectly reasoned, in-depth conversations.  But when you throw those kinds of assertions out there that are simply not backed up by any evidence (at least not any evidence that is not incredibly biased because it's written by christian apologists and pastors) and are hotly debated in the field of biblical scholarship, what kind of response do you genuinely think that you're going to get?  Especially when you've just told me in another post that nothing is going to make me feel better when I'm suffering and burning eternally in hell.  You lost some significant credibility with that one, Chris.  I thought you were better than those fire and brimstone pastors out there.

            1. Chris Neal profile image76
              Chris Nealposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              a) I'm sorry if you respect me less than you did before. Believe it or not I'm not one of those who seem determined to be a jerk and in everyone's face. BUT, I'm not saying things that I haven't said before. You may well have not read them, but I've said them. And come on, you know I'm a Calvinist so what, exactly, are you expecting me to say?

              b) I wasn't so much comparing you to other atheists as I was commenting on the sort of one-upsmanship game of "yes it is/no it isn't" that was started. If you have thoughts and/or research, great. I'm open. You might convince me. But simply stating that they don't agree and leaving it at that is the sort of thing that ATM revels in. I get tired. If I over-reacted, I'm sorry.

              c) If you out of hand dismiss the credibility of apologists and pastors, what makes your evidence any better? You can say that I only seem to cite these people, and you're right, but it could equally be said that you only cite people who come to the table skeptical. I'm not saying you're wrong, even if I disagree with you. I'm saying that your evidence is just as suspect from my point of view as mine is from yours. I'm still willing to listen.

              d) I really was mainly referring to what believers think when people talk about the stupidity of worshipping "an egotistical being." Of course I believe it's true for everyone, but I was mainly pointing out that if you truly believe, why would you behave differently? Short of being converted to non-belief?

        3. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          You have a direct reply for tsmog? Or annlynn9 for that matter? Athiest here seem to pick and choose which answers the want to put-down and ignore the really difficult ones

          1. JMcFarland profile image69
            JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            in an open forum like this, it's impossible to respond to every post.  A fact that you well know, since you just change the subject every time someone refutes one of your ridiculous claims.  Science follows the evidence wherever it leads, and refuting evolution (not that you have, by pointing to the IRC blog post and a few youtube videos) does not automatically mean that a god exists, let alone the god that you believe in. 

            Don't assume that atheists don't know what the bible says about prophecy, etc. I have had over 15 years of studying the bible, and I've done it on a collegiate level.  As a friend of mine often says (who is a published author and atheist podcaster) atheists are not the ones that are uninformed about religion.  Often they are guilty of studying it too much.

            1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              So in other words... 'no.'  Thought so wink

              1. JMcFarland profile image69
                JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                no, what?  No one can follow your posts when you only reply to yourself.

    40. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
      Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The Bible has been proven chronology, historically and continues to be proven through archeology wink

      1. A Troubled Man profile image59
        A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        lol Good one.

      2. JMcFarland profile image69
        JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Oh good.  Demonstrate that what you are claiming is actually true.  We will all wait.

      3. profile image0
        Deepes Mindposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        I hope you are ready to back this one up.. The atheists are waiting to pounce on this one

      4. profile image0
        Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, archeology has just proven that the earth is 6000 years old?

      5. getitrite profile image71
        getitriteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        What about scientifically?   Has the violation of the laws of nature claimed in the bible been proven to be possible?   Are there any experiments that I am not aware of that shows evidence that a man can part a massive body of water, just by waving a magic wand?   Has Jesus not conducted any experiments where he resurrected a corpse that had been dead for several days?  And did he get it peer reviewed.  Thanks

        1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          In this modern age of technology - do you not know how to research? Or perhaps you do not want to know the truth.. cf  John 3:19, 1 Cor. 2:14. There are many hits on your favorite search engine for the points I have mentioned...
          Archaeology: Many people did not believe in the Bible because they thought it mentioned cities that did not exist, until archaeology finally found proof of those cities. http://www.prevailmagazine.org/how-arch … the-bible/
          History: Everything the Bible says happened, has happened. http://agards-bible-timeline.com/q9_his … bible.html
          Chronologically: Everything the Bible says happened, has happened in the order it says it has (Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medio-Persia, Greece and Rome in that order is just one example)
          It makes things easier when we understand that evolution has been proven scientifically impossible as well wink http://www.icr.org/article/2464/, http://toptenproofs.com/print/evolution.html, http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread163678/pg1
          Getitright: Aman did not part the waters, God did. and as for the ressurection... http://christianity.about.com/od/easter … ection.htm
          Anyway, if you "truly" seek truth, it is out there to find... http://www.rzim.eu/why-trust-the-bible, http://andyramjohn.hubpages.com/hub/Can … eBeTrusted

          1. profile image0
            Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Matthew 24:34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

    41. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
      Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this
      1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
        MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Wow, that was really embarrassing.

        1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
          Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          "Taken together, then, these points mean that Christian belief in the Bible rests on a number of dierent factors, all of which exist in a clear theological relationship to each other. The starting point of our faith in Christ means that our confidence is placed firmly in the gospel and the work of the Spirit. Through these means we are able to experience the ‘utter certainty’ about the Bible that Calvin described, ‘just as if we were gazing upon the majesty of God himself ’. This gospel presupposition and rationale embraces the Bible’s truthfulness and reliability because of God’s truthfulness, because the Bible’s words are God’s words, and because Jesus himself regarded the Bible in this way. It works out from here to see all the internal evidence that the Scriptures are from God himself, and its examination of all the external evidence is coupled with the gospel presupposition that God has actually given us all the evidence we need to know that he is there and to believe in him."  Not embarrassing at all, considering ALL science is based on presuppositions smile

          1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
            MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            That was embarrassing too.

            I would go into a list of reasons why, but you would willfully ignore them.

            I will say that completely dismissing an idea that you don't understand (and it is quite obvious that you don't understand) makes me question your faith.  Blind faith is really the opposite of faith.  It is standing with your fingers in your ears saying nah-nah-nah because you are really afraid that what you hear will weaken your beliefs.

            You're entire argument is basically "Other Christians said" or "These Christian scientists said"... You have no arguments of your own, all you are doing is regurgitating what other people have said.

            1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
              Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              First you insist that we offer something in support of our claims, then when we provide it, you claim it's biased and now insist of an argument of our own???  And for the record, where do you think your support of anything atheistic or in regards to evolution would come from??? Are you thinking you can offer something that other historic atheist haven't already said?  You have something groundbreaking?  I offer what the 'scholars' have already studied. Atheists like to think they are intelligent by trying to twist everything around - yet that's the only place it goes is around in circles... And for the record, Melissa, I have 'studied' most of the arguments already, in order to strengthen my beliefs, so I actually do not have a fear of them weakening - nice try though wink

              1. JMcFarland profile image69
                JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                oh, and just FYI - Melissa is a believer, not an atheist.  That's the problem with jumping into a forum that's already in progress, making blanket assumptions about complete strangers and then running with those assumptions.  I know it seems crazy that a believer would post against another believers' arguments, but when those arguments have been demonstrated to be false repeatedly, it's a matter of honest intellectualism.  You may want to know something about the people that you're talking to before jumping to conclusions.

                1. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                  Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I called her an atheist? Whose making assumptions now?

                2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
                  Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Also, you claim that my arguments have been demonstrated to be false repeatedly, yet, I haven't heard anything about my first and original post about the Bible being proven archaeologically, historically and chronologically.. hmmm. Nor have you been able to answer the topic of Bible prophecy, other than you have studied the Bible.

                  1. JMcFarland profile image69
                    JMcFarlandposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    biblical "prophecies" do not meet the criteria of prophecies at all.

                    1) Vague and non-specific.  These prophecies can be fit to meet any criterea
                    2) most of the messianic prophecies that christians use to point to jesus were not considered to be prophetic writings by the jews.  That's why they don't accept Jesus as the messiah.  Therefore these "prophecies" were not intended to be prophecies, and the can be thrown out.
                    3) must be met by one, specific incident and one alone.
                    4) Cannot be self-fulfilling, and cannot be claimed true BECAUSE people actually worked to fulfill them.

                    If I wake up in the morning and say "I'm going to have a steak for dinner" and then go out to a restaurant that serves steak and order a steak for dinner, have I just fulfilled a prophecy?  No.  I have actively worked to fulfill what I said that I wanted.

                    have some places discussed in the bible been archaeologically proven to be real places?  Sure.  that doesn't make the whole book true.  Spiderman was written about New York City, and we know that New York city exists, so does that make Spiderman real?  nope.  The Odyssey is about real places, and speaks about real events like the trojan war.  Does that make all of the mythological aspects of the Odyssey true?  Not at all.

                  2. profile image0
                    Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Again, the universe is more than a few thousand years old, there is no evidence of a world wide flood and all this was not created in 6 days.

          2. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Well, at least you have admitted to knowing nothing about science.

    42. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
      Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      "Obviously if i'm an atheist and I don't believe in your God, why would I take your scriptures as evidence? That doesn't make any sense."
      -You would/should take the scriptures as evidence only after having done research on where the scriptures actually come from

      "Not to mention the bible has this nasty ideal that everything in it is true because God said its true."
      - I don't know which Christians you've been talking to, but 'I' believe the Bible to be true because of historical evidences. People of that time wrote down what they saw and heard. It would be no different than using an archive of local newspapers as evidence of what took place during a specific time.

      Let's not forget that the Bible was written over 1200 years and by more than 40 different Authors
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible

  2. profile image0
    Emile Rposted 13 years ago

    Good luck getting christians to understand that. I haven't seen anyone make headway, as of yet.

    And, the book idea is probably a no go. I tried that with a thread and it sort of p*ssed them off. I couldn't get anyone to believe God and I had a coffee chat, much less that he had sent a message.

  3. wilderness profile image76
    wildernessposted 13 years ago

    Because it is the only thing they have to offer as proof?  Without hard evidence, no matter how slim it might be, there is only the holy book left.

    1. profile image51
      Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Well what good is that without hard evidence?

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Be careful. Some people will claim that the bible is supported by many different knowledgeable fields, including science.

        There was a thread started on this basis, just the other day. I'll see if I can find it. wink

      2. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
        Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        To us it is useless without evidence. to them faith is the point so evidence is not even wanted. It's two different approaches to life and two entirely different mind sets.

        All us atheists are going to hell. That's all there is to it and nothing we can do about it because we don't have the faith gene, we have the proof gene. lol...

        1. profile image51
          Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          lol i'm stealing that last part!!

          1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
            Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Consider it yours. wink

        2. Mikel G Roberts profile image74
          Mikel G Robertsposted 13 years agoin reply to this
      3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
        Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Rabgix, you do not realized that we know only one promille from what we do not know and you always asking for evidence.

    2. dfbishopsr profile image59
      dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      There is no hard evidence that could be presented that would make anyone believe who does not want to believe.

      1. DoubleScorpion profile image77
        DoubleScorpionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        I would think that if "God" would feed all of the starving children and wipe out world hunger that would be pretty good evidence for most. That shouldn't be to hard. "He fed the Israelites with Manna. And Jesus fed 5000 men as well as the women and children present with 2 fish and 5 loaves of bread."

        1. Don Crowson profile image59
          Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I would think  that the earth is capable of producing enough food to feed everyone that is hungry.  If that is true, the problem is in distribution. If that is true, the reason for hunger is that man has not provided the distribution.

          The distribution, then, would involve people who refuse to let some people eat the fruits of their labor. That would be dictators and governments who are unjustly denying food to political enemies. And of course, there are lands that are not suitable for crop growth but people leave those lands except in the cases in which they are forced to occupy such l;and by people who do not love their fellow man.

          Appears to me that God has don His part, and man either does not farm the land or refuses to share the fruits of his labor.

          1. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            God did not provide any information or guidance whatsoever for the distribution of food so that everyone gets fed. That is failure on His part.



            Then, you are referring to the USA, which must be a dictatorship or is unjustly denying food as there are many who are hungry.



            That would the fault of your God not providing enough suitable land for crop growth.



            God has failed to provide everything man needs to sustain himself here. In fact, within the very same country, some people are fed while others go hungry.

            1. Don Crowson profile image59
              Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              You obviously live in a place that is void of all communication if you are saying the United States has hungry people. You need to check you facts for yuour assertion.  Please show your evidence.  And remember only in the US are people poor who drive cars, have TVs and internet connections.  Don't count them in your assertion. 

              I am eager to see your proof.

              1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
                MelissaBarrettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                And you had to go and screw it up...

                The U.S. has quite a few hungry people who are neither driving cars or watching T.V.

                http://feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-ame … stics.aspx

                I'll forgive you though, you obviously live in a place that is void of all communication.

                1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                  A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  lol Thanks, Melissa.

                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
                    MelissaBarrettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Quite welcome... denying that there are starving people in America surprisingly generally leads to MORE starving people in America.

                2. Don Crowson profile image59
                  Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Interesting.  I do not see where the definition of poverty is given. Nor do I see how hunger is defined.

                  Of course poverty is defined by income. But some income is not included; therefore, the figures of people in poverty is inflated. Some people can make a lot of money that is excluded. 

                  Did you hear about the lottery winner in Michigan?  He qualified for food stamps both before and after winning the lottery.

                  And hunger is defined as having missed a certain number of meals. doesn't matter how well fed a person is the remainder of the year.

                  Third thing to consider is that a few years ago the Food Stamp program went out to recruit people for their food stamps.  Therefore, we are looking at statistics without verification.

                  Ever did down to discover the real way government money is spent? And you want me to believe your stats without definitions. Really?

                  Edited to add.  Google "Food Stamp Fraud," and you will see some additional information about poverty and hunger in this country,. And it appears that God has provided the food, man must act as a farmer--Check Adam and Eve as they leave the Garden of Eden.  Therefore, man's corruption is the cause of people going hungry

                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
                    MelissaBarrettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Okay, how about watching a mother actually pass out from hunger in front of me because what little food there was she gave to her children?  How about watching bone-thin homeless stumble into a food kitchen that only operated 2 days a week due to lack of funding?  How about helping a family who's child was actually diagnosed with rickets?  Rickets for Christ's sake.

                    I have personally seen these things. My definition of poverty is a whole family living under a railroad tressel. Not in New York City, not in LA, but in Weston or Grafton WV (That's as small town as it gets)  Go look yourself, because obviously there is a whole world that you are failing to see. 

                    Your heart is hard.  There are better ways of protesting "entitlements" or "welfare" then denying that there are Americans starving to death... and they sure as hell aren't typing on the internet or driving cars while they are doing it. If you deny them and turn your heart towards their plight, why even bother to worship Christ?

                  2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                    A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Money. Food. Does that help?



                    Yes, he was a good Christian. Here's what his lawyer said about Fick's case:

                    "But from his standpoint, he did what he was supposed to do -- he informed the state, and the state said he could keep using the card. The problem is with the state."

                    Do you have a point to your argument? Does this help in how we should believe in your God?



                    My goodness, what an incredible fable, all fabricated just to defend your God and your lack of compassion. Bravo!

            2. dfbishopsr profile image59
              dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              It always amazes me that man wants to blame God, but doesn't want to praise God. It is the sign of unbelief and a refusal to accept responsibility for ones actions. It's as if man is innocent and God is guilty.
              It borders on blasphemy.

              1. Cagsil profile image68
                Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                This statement should show you that your thinking is still first century. Not to mention, it's only blasphemy for those who actually believe in the god you make claim to exist.

              2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Really? All I ever hear from believers is praise for God but they never blame Him for anything even when they make it obvious they are praising God for exactly the same things He should take blame.



                LOL! Yet, it is the believer who never accepts responsibility for their actions. It borders on hypocrisy. lol

              3. earnestshub profile image70
                earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                How is it blasphemy to ignore a myth about a psychopathic murderer?




                Kill People Who Don't Listen to Priests

                    Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death.  Such evil must be purged from Israel.  (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)



                Kill Witches

                    You should not let a sorceress live.  (Exodus 22:17 NAB)



                Kill Homosexuals
                    "If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."  (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)



                Kill Fortunetellers

                    A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death.  (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)



                Death for Hitting Dad

                    Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death.  (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

                1. Petra Vlah profile image59
                  Petra Vlahposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Your comment has two possible answers:
                  a) God gave permission to priests to abuse children
                  b) Kill anyone who you perceive as sinner (witches, fortunetellers, homosexuals)

                  It seems to me your God wrote the rules of discrimination - So much for unconditional love

            3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
              Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              To: Troubled man. Food shortage is artificially made. God blessed this country; we use to cast grain to the sea.  We now use land for energy (corn). All poverty is intentionally to control.  Please do not blame God. God gave this earth to us. Have you ever seen agricultural college? God gave us free oil. He gave us green plants to breath in CO2 and gave us Oxygen. what else you want from God?

              1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                I'm sure you want to make yourself feel good about your God in order to defend your beliefs, but such a lame and failed response to support your God is laughable, and sad at the same time.

                Blame Canada, then. lol

                1. Tlherald85 profile image62
                  Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  In my opinion Thats kind of funny cause the government is "supposively" a "Christian" governement!!

                  1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                    Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    we do not have Christian government. We have socialistic-capitalism worse system you may have.

      2. Andy Ramjohn profile image67
        Andy Ramjohnposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" 1 Cor. 1:18 big_smile

  4. Cagsil profile image68
    Cagsilposted 13 years ago

    Sorry, cannot find it. hmm

  5. SpanStar profile image61
    SpanStarposted 13 years ago

    I'm wondering if an atheists doesn't believe in God or any god what does it matter what the bible says, or what Christains believe?

    1. Cagsil profile image68
      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Purpose of learning. Didn't you know those who don't believe in a god, are always out to learn more, gain more knowledge, regardless of where it comes from. hmm

      1. SpanStar profile image61
        SpanStarposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        I understanding the idea of learning but I also know what attacks look like and I seem to me that more attacking Christians has been going then learning example: by "Rabgix: Well what good is that without hard evidence?"  I've said it more then once that God didn't send his believers down here to prove his existence but learners as you have implied continue to ask for or demand proof-doesn't sound like learning to me.

        1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
          Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Right. Shut up and accept the slop we hand you as fact even though it isn't because we have no evidence, we don't like evidence and asking for evidence is evil. . lol...

          If you think asking for evidence is an attack you must be an easy mark for all the con men in the world. When will you people learn that learning involves evidence? No we don't believe you and we can't take your word for anything. That isn't an attack, it's  rational thinking.

          1. SpanStar profile image61
            SpanStarposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Slarty O'Brian,

            Those remarks sound just like somebody who doesn't know what the heck they're talking about.

            No Christian needs to entertain the kind of ignorance you present.  If you want evidence about Christian faith then get on your knees in prayer  and ask God to open you're eyes maybe then you'll see the light.

            1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
              Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              They may not need to, That's for certain. But they do. Maybe not in those words but that's beside the point.

              Your remarks sound like some one who is too easily offended by their beliefs being thrown back at them in terms they are unfamiliar with.. But I knew that when you got upset and felt attacked by some one asking for evidence.

              I've already seen the light. that's why I am an atheist. That's what prayer and bible study did for me. The evidence I received tells me the Christian god is a fantasy. If there is a god Christianity hasn't found it.

              My time for praying to imaginary friends is long gone. I can't imagine why you would think you telling me to pray would come as a revelation. You aren't the first to tell me to do that. More like the millionth. Had I thought about it I would have counted and awarded a prize for the millionth time some one told me to do that, assuming I never had.

              News flash! Jesus was the "good news" 2000  years ago. It's old hat now.
              Yes, we know about it. We don't buy it. Get over it.

              Now if you want to take one of my remarks in the last post and tell me how it is not in other terms what you your self said then I will be happy to argue the points with you. wink

              1. SpanStar profile image61
                SpanStarposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Another New Flash-I'm Not Here To Arguing The Points With You.-You Don't Believe In God Good-No One Is Twisting Your Arm To Do So-Not Even This Christian God.  You Don't Believe Good Again Go On Your Merry Way But Stop Trying To Make Other's Like You-Because News Flash They Just Might NOT Want TO BE LIKE YOU.

                1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
                  Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Are you projecting? lol... You could have written the same thing concerning yourself and your own attitude.

                  What did you come to a discussion form for? To complain that people are discussing things? Rather odd, isn't it?

                  1. Levertis Steele profile image72
                    Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    A discussion? When people discuss, they respect each others' rights, not disrespect each other. This is more like an altercation.

              2. mommygonebonkers profile image61
                mommygonebonkersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Slarty, I feel for you a little. I don't know what happened to you in the past to make you so obviously hostile towards the idea of a God and I don't need to know and maybe you can't pinpoint in yourself.
                But, I have a feeling that there's still a part of you that believes. You know "Methinks thou dost protest too much?"
                I don't see many Christians out there posting forums "Why DON"T you believe in God?" or "What's with all the ignorant people out there who don't believe in God"...nope, for the most part we go about our own lives because we are content in what we believe in, because we know it to be true.
                Yes, there are a lot of "Christians" out there that try to jam their beliefs down others throats, but they are the minority. They are the loudest, for sure, but the minority still. The rest of us live a life of love and peace (as did Jesus) and let others use the free will that God gave them.
                You have your own mind to make up and demanding that others give proof right here right now is kind of strange. Why does it offend you so much? So, you don't believe it, fine, but why take such offense?

                1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
                  Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  You misread me completely but I understand why. I have a wonderful and fulfilled life searching for answers since I was 6 years old. I have nothing against Christians and they have never done anything to me to make me hate them.

                  I am not hostile to a god or the idea of a god. Nature is god. I love nature. I don't even have to call it god. But ti is the same thing. So the concept of a god is not the issue.

                  What is at issue is the concept of the Christian god. In particular the concept that this god is omnipotent and perfect and that even when it does obvious evil according to the bible, Christianity says it was all just and good and loving.

                  Evil = good when god does it because god defines what the words mean.
                  To me that is the definition of an insane and dangerous concept.

                  Kill my son and I will forgive you original sin. What? How can a christian accept that as an act of love?

                  I do not hate the Christian god because I do not believe it exists. But I regard and judge the Christian religion and the bible like I would any myth or fantasy novel and give my opinion of what is written in them.

                  If human characters in a novel acted the way the christian god supposedly does, no Christian would say they thought the characters were moral. But when it comes to this story, black is white and white is black.

                  The problem is, this is a story some people take as being fact, not a novel. So this twisted idea of love seeps out  into the world, particularly in the form of fundamentalism.

                  So yes, I am a bit of a militant atheist where fundamentalist Christianity is concerned, just as I am a bit in fear of Islamic fundamentalism and it's negative effects on the world.

                  The average Christian and I usually can get along very well.

                  But to the point of your post, I think: the exchange I had with SpanStar was not typical of the way I argue with people on discussion forums. But it is one of the ways I can argue.

                  People forget that when they come to a discussion forum it is open to all opinions. It is not real time reality. We wouldn't be talking this way if it were. People avoid the topic of religion out there on the street. What do I care what my grocery clerk believes? What does he or she care what I believe?

                  But I see people come to these forums all the time complaining about the fact that people express their opinion. This is the last place on earth people actually can express their honest opinion. Why come here to complain that people are asking questions? In this case considering the request for evidence an attack for goodness sake. lol...

                  So nope. I'm fine. Just long winded and opinionated. wink You have a great day.

                  1. Lapse profile image60
                    Lapseposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    I'm glad you mentioned Christian God being omnipotent!

                    My problem with it all (The concept of Judeo-Christian God) is that God being omnipotent by definition means he has infinite power and therefore the COMPLETE knowledge of everything.  Meaning that God KNOWS what every action or lack of action He has taken has impacted/caused.  He therefore knows the past present and future.  SO He KNOWINGLY has CAUSED EVERYTHING to EVER happen.  Good, Evil, etc.

                    (I suppose unless you claim he has never taken that first action then he is only an observer? - but that is pointless)

                    Therefore man has no freewill and its all just a sequence of events sent into motion by God?  Now isn't THAT depressing?  Everything is a production put on by God?

                  2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                    Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Slarty O'Brian. Hey it was somebody else who started this forum, not we Christians. Many of us only response. You miss many links, since you do not know the Bible. But you are forgiven. God is love and He is the same time just. If God say something you would accuse Him He does not keep the world. He warned us again and again but we were ignorant. Then we blame Him.  See He is not running this world we are. If He would He would be worse manager in universe.  In the future yes He would judge in last day. It is up to us to correct our faith. We had and perhaps have plenty time.  Yes God did punish people through Law before Jesus came. But people were in covenant with Him. Covenants have own strict rules.  Everyone would be upset if one would change horses in the middle or run.
                    God is love and He gave us His own Son, who was murdered for our sin. What else for heaven sake more God can do. Would you give your son for salvation of others?

          2. Eaglekiwi profile image72
            Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            So if God can not be proven (to you) does that mean he doesnt exist. wink

        2. wilderness profile image76
          wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          There were basically two things that can be learned in this context.  A non-believer can learn what your beliefs are; you can give him your opinions and he learns.

          He might also wish to learn about the universe; you again give the same opinions but nothing is learned.  At best he can pick and choose amonst the thousands of opinions he gathers and can form his own beliefs, but he still has learned nothing.  That's where the evidence comes in.

          1. SpanStar profile image61
            SpanStarposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Wilderness,

                I understand your approach to the question and it's an admirable one but first let started by asking the question-How Long Has The Christian faith been under attack (WOW)?  So first of all we are certain there are those who aren't interested in learning only condemning.

                Secondly Christian teaching gives people a choice and based on the arguements I've seen though the years that choice is to be like the world not like Christians because Christians are not to be like the world.

                 We argue concepts as if they are facts for example we've argue there has to be Aliens out in space we don't know that there is any life beyond ours but we argue There Must Be simply because our sciences predicts the existence.  Anyone that doesn't believe their's other live forms are just plain ignorant-who needs these kinds of arguements?

            1. wilderness profile image76
              wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              The Christian faith has been under attack since it was created by the nobility of church and state that wanted more power over the people.  Unfortunately, the only teachings the church has to offer are, as I said, teaching what the opinions of church leaders are.  They may include teaching history, but only as they interpret the bible - a tome which was written centuries after the history happened and includes only the "history" the church wants to teach.

              Christian teaching does indeed give people a choice - to believe and agree the opinions of others as to what the bible means or not.  If this means that the perception of Christians does not fit the physical facts of the world (and it usually does not) then indeed, Christians are not to be like the rest of the population.

              Assuming that the learned in our world predict alien life forms (and most probably do) the argument might go like this:

              1)It is not wise to be anthropomorphic - every time we fall into that trap we find ourselves wrong.  That neither we nor our insignificant planet are anything special or different is the lesson here.

              2)We see a great many other planets in a great many other solar systems.  Although very difficult to find, we are doing so everywhere we look.

              3) Based on 1) and 2) we can then reasonably expect to find 10000000000000000000000 other planets in our universe (or whatever the number is).

              4) Based on our concept of how planets form (supported by 2)) we can reasonably predict that some of those other planets are capable of bearing life.  They have the necessary ingredients.

              5)Based on our understand of the (well proven) theory of evolution we can confidently predict the formation of life on some of those planets that can bear it.  A very low percentage perhaps, but greater than 0.  Maybe .0000000000001% will develop life; that would mean there are 10000000000 other planets with life.

              Now, I'm not saying this is the current reasoning (certainly not the numbers!), but it could be and in any case will be something like this.  Observations coupled with understand of how the universe works put through the computer between our ears results in a logical conclusion of probable fact.  Not certainty of course, but highly probable.

              The reasoning for God's existence may go something like this:
              "God exists because...pause...my own interpretation of the words that I believe God wrote say he is there.  And lots of other people have agreed with me.  This means it is absolutely true with no doubt whatsoever."  What it actually means is "I believe because I want to and don't care about observations and/or logical reasoning.

              Do you see the difference?  Alien life is supported by observation and understanding of relevant facts of our world and universe.  Should you not be cognizant of those facts then, by definition, you are ignorant.  Should you understand those facts but disagree with the reasoning then it becomes incumbent on you to point out the flaws or provide alternate observations and reasoning.  What no one should ever do is look at and understand the observations and reasoning and declare "I don't believe that to be true because I don't want it to be or because it conflicts with other beliefs I have decided to embrace.

      2. aguasilver profile image73
        aguasilverposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        2 Timothy 3:7-8
        King James Version (KJV)


        Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

        Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.

        Guess that sums it up.

        1. dfbishopsr profile image59
          dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Thank you for using the Word, for the Word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two edged sword... It breaks the hear like a hammer and chisel. Man will not listen to reason, but the authority of God's word is exceedingly more powerful than any of man's intellectual prowess.

          1. Cagsil profile image68
            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Reason? lol lol

            1. dfbishopsr profile image59
              dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Sorry, a misprint, I meant to say, "man will listen to reason" (or at least what he considers reason, or reasonable).

              1. Cagsil profile image68
                Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Really? I talk to believers all the time and they don't listen to any reasonable statement. They just re-state their nonsense as though it has reason or even a reasonable truth to it.

                It's beyond all reason to think that YOUR god actually plays any role in anyone else's life, other than your own.

                Again, I've said this before and I'll say it again for those who don't seem to comprehend reason- it's your belief then keep it in your own life and quit applying it to everyone.

                Secondly, if you use the word "god" as in the "god" describe in any of the world's religions, then you haven't obviously listen to the teachings of Jesus to begin with. However, if you believe in a higher power and you want to apply the "god" word to it, then fine, do so. But, again, it's your belief and it should be applied to only your life.

                Common sense dictates that just because you believe in a higher power, it doesn't actually make that higher power an actual authority.

                1. dfbishopsr profile image59
                  dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Does your response mean that man is not interested in reason - including yourself? I suspect you are only interested in putting down people who do not agree with you; and you are most likely not interested in discovering truth if it means you have to change what you believe, or disbelieve. I also see no further purpose to be served in this back and forth exchange. You are set in your ways as am I. As are all those who believe that Jesus Christ is indeed God in the flesh.

                  1. Cagsil profile image68
                    Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    No, my response implies that only believers refuse to listen to reason. I'm always willing to listen to anyone, however, when it comes to irrationality and nonsense, I'll point it out.
                    Excuse you? This is your condescending way of making a claim that you know something about me? I was born and raised Catholic. I even researched world religions for over 10+ years and presently hold NO belief whatsoever about it. I have come to an understanding that world religions are a detriment to world peace. I've seen the effects, and your statement is living proof.
                    I'm sure you would see no purpose in communicating, because you're right and your belief must be applied to everyone, because that's what you believe. Too bad it's a limited view.
                    I am not set in my ways. I'm constantly changing my knowledge and discerning wisdom(truth). Life is ever-changing. If you don't understand that, then it's YOU who don't understand your own life.
                    And, your inability to see you've been deceived is your own fault, as is it for every other believer. You should listen to Jesus and understand that HE despised religion and even called it a false god/idol. Yet, the only place you can find Jesus' teachings are inside religion?

                    The fact that you've never questioned those two things, is again your own fault.

          2. aguasilver profile image73
            aguasilverposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            My pleasure, and it NEVER returns void.

            Thanks

            1. Cagsil profile image68
              Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Of course Aqua, you'll take all the pats on your back you can, so you can reassure yourself that you're supposed truth is actual truth, just because someone agreed with you. roll

              The gullibility of believers borders on the absurd. lol

              1. aguasilver profile image73
                aguasilverposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                See what I mean Emile, just here to disrupt and insult, not worth replying to except to illustrate the banality of such behaviour.

                1. Cagsil profile image68
                  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  If you find it insulting, then apparently it's truth being applied.

                  Only gullible people believe nonsense.

                  1. aguasilver profile image73
                    aguasilverposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    http://www.kentpropertydirect.com/FORUM.jpg

      3. Eaglekiwi profile image72
        Eaglekiwiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Aww Cags your answer is a little disappointing.

        Don't you know , haven't you learned that the best things in life are never learned from any book.

        The Bible however is useful to instruct or provide history.

        Personally  when looking for evidence of anything is it not preferable to look at a wide range of evidence, ie various sources.

        I have found many people who live their lives gracefully  and in humilty ,others far less so,which brings it all back to the individual......

        Therefore I say , it is not about this or that , or him or her , or that Church ,or that believer ,or that athiest ,it is always about who do you say Christ is ?

        Ultimately that is where the question will always be.....

        It was asked 2,000 years ago and it so it is still being asked...

        That in itself has got to strike a chord with the most solid sceptic

        1. JMcFarland profile image69
          JMcFarlandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          doesn't strike a chord with me.  There.  Your argument fails.

          Next.

        2. A Troubled Man profile image59
          A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Speaking of disappointing answers, where do you get the notion the Bible has much to do with history? Certainly, no one refers to it when they want to find out something in history, they refer to something we like to call, "History Books"



          That is exactly opposite of what we should be doing when looking for evidence. It IS preferable to have a wide range of various sources.

    2. profile image51
      Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Knowledge mostly. Religion by definition seems to discourage free thought but the answer to everything is either "God did it" or "All part of God's plan."

      1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
        Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        It's all god's plan. He set everything in motion and keeps atoms together. But according to Christians he is not to blame for anything.

        It's like saying Hitler is not to blame for the second world war or the murder of millions of Jews. He ordered it and planned it but he didn't actually kill anyone himself.  No one had to do what he said, they had a free choice. lol...

      2. GinaCPocan profile image62
        GinaCPocanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        You know what Rabgix, God DID do a lot of things.Most people don't read the bible.
        I hear it all the time. "I read the bible from cover to cover, I know all about the bible". The bible is a complexed book, its not meant for a one time read. Its made to be studied. First off, the bible is very clear on what it wants to convey. There are parables and examples in it, yes and you learn which ones those are after many reads. Its actually for the most part quite literal.
        God made everything, which means he made night and day, light and dark, good and evil. God is not perfect in the sense most people expect him to be. But he is made perfect because he is who he is "GOD", the "Creator", which then makes him the Boss. he can do whatever he wants.He has that right, he is the "Creator", he makes the rules.
        Anyway, there actually several biblical entries where God had openly repented for things he did. Don't twist this into an Anti-God campaign cause technically he has the right to do with us as he sees fit. Its really too complexed to explain on this forum, but the only one ever perfect was Christ, and this is why he was sent. Not to destroy but to save, and so we didn't have to do the tiring practices the Jews had to for their Salvation. He chosen someone of perfection to absorb the sins of the imperfect, so there was someone between us and HIM worthy enough to handle the tasks at hand. We needed a Christ because man by nature is a sinner. Man can not stop sinning. They sin in their thoughts, and in their acts. God understood this. So he gave us Christ, our Lawyer so to speak.
        And to whom this may concern, its really difficult to be doomed to hell unless you flat out rebuke God, and why shouldn't they go to hell, why should God hand over the keys to Heaven to someone that hates him, or don't even recognize him. But, FYI a true Christian would not tell anyone that they were doomed to hell because its not their place to decide this, they would know this if they read the bible. It is Gods decision and no one knows whats in the hearts of anyone except the person in question and God.

        1. GinaCPocan profile image62
          GinaCPocanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I have never seen Creationism part of any public school curriculum in Illinois. I been dealing with schools for over 30 years.

          I have never seen Christianism forced on anyone either. I have seen it presented, never forced. That's a far cry from forced. But I also posted, its not true Christianity to force or push someone to believe in any way.

        2. profile image51
          Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          You are aware that there are innumerable religions with the exact same ideals as yours that predate Christianity?

          If anything Christianity is just a melting pot of pagan beliefs, a little Horus and some Mithras thrown in there. Judging by the time period it all makes sense.

          The God you have just described....why would you choose to follow an ideal like? There are many religions to pick from and you pick the one where god is blatantly a douchebag who created us for his own amusement basically?

          This God you speak of isn't real. I don't see how people can still believe in something so ridiculous and ripped off other religions, but humans have never truly been rational as a whole.

        3. A Troubled Man profile image59
          A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          That would explain a lot. You find nothing in scientific theories even after "studying" them yet a single book of myths replete with invisible, magical beings, imps and demons is real proof.

          LOL!

      3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
        Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Rabgix, yeah, religion is mostly wrong. Apparently many do not know what is religion and faith in operation. There are some religious group "good" but not enough to justify. Listen I do not judge, just clarify.

  6. profile image0
    Emile Rposted 13 years ago

    My earlier post on this thread was flippant and unfair. The truth is, it would be foolish not to allow the Bible to be included as back up in a theological discussion. Any religious text should be included. Theology is about a god. You are somewhat required to use the texts that argue for his existence, when discussing it.

    1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
      Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      But the problem is it does not contain proof a god exists.It contains no arguments for a god's existence. It demands you have faith a god exists, on penalty of eternal torture if you don't.

      But you are right. The book helps them try to make that point, and is the source of that point. They can't help but use it.

      1. profile image0
        Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        No Slarty. I would disagree, but probably not on the grounds you think. A discussion on the probability of the existence of a god is not, in my opinion, a theological discussion. That is a debate. At which point a religious text can not be included as evidence.

        A religious text could be used in a philosophical discussion, but not to back up an argument for the existence of a god.

        A theological discussion is a discussion about a god. As such, the discussion would begin with the premise that one exists.

        1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
          Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I don't think we disagree at all. wink

        2. recommend1 profile image58
          recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Then the discussion should be about the pseudo science of theology.

          1. profile image0
            Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Ohhh, the term pseudo science might be lending to much credence to such a discussion.

            But, I do think there is some good to be done by arguing from a stance that a god exists. I don't know if it is possible to get through to the religious that their interpretations are just that; but I do know that arguing from a firm atheist stance is seen by many of them as a satanic attack and they just throw up a brick wall in the discussion.

            1. recommend1 profile image58
              recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Starting any discussion from the premise that there is a god is ridiculous when such a thing is patently absurd.  If we take the flying spaghetti monster as example and start the discussion with the premise that it exists then we are already admitting the possibility of such a thing.

              I have tried to argue by denying that I have even heard of such stupid idea as there being a supreme being who made us all - that stops the discussion pretty quickly rather than any kind of debate, maybe that is the best way to deal with arrogant stupidity, I am not sure ?

              1. profile image0
                Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                On a personal level, I agree. But when they use religion to perpetuate bigotry and hatred toward large groups of people I don't see that argument effective in making them stop and think about their actions.

                1. GinaCPocan profile image62
                  GinaCPocanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Anyone who uses religion to perpetuate bigotry and hatred toward large groups of people isn't a religion but a cult. A true Christian Congregation does not get involved with that. The Bible speaks against it. For instance, some Christian Church's have openly shunned the marriage of black and whites for years. The fact is, Moses was Jewish, married to a black woman who was a shepard girl. His brother and sister objected to it, but God basically told them to mind their own business. True Christians don't hate anyone, but they will pray for people, even large groups of them from all corners of the globe.

              2. Brupie profile image68
                Brupieposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                If you start discussions with insults you may end debate, but the only point you've proven is that you are not respectful of other's ideas.  If you say something like, "I just haven't found any convincing evidence" or "I see a lot of reasons to think otherwise" you don't insult others but make it clear that you don't buy it.

                In logic you're expected to either dispute the premises or the logic of the argument.  To reject the conclusion with an insult is a fallacy.

                1. recommend1 profile image58
                  recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  You clearly miss the point - to start with the premise of a god is the fallacy.  There is no conclusion that holds up to any argument, reasoning or even wild chance.

                  1. Brupie profile image68
                    Brupieposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    You speak of the nonexistence of God as a premise, but you're stating it as a fact.  A fact you can't prove because proving a negative isn't possible.  Stating something without any proof is a common fallacy, the Latin term is argumentum ad ignoratiam.

                2. Levertis Steele profile image72
                  Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  This is so true.

              3. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
                Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Well that is why I helped develop Scientific Pantheism in the  1990s.

                A pantheist says that there is nothing but god. Of course that means there is no divine being because if everything is divine, nothing is. Words like god and divine depend on there being a not divine and a not god.

                So Pantheists are in essence atheists. Scientific Pantheism is a way to explain that what religion is really talking about when they say god is the nature of existence itself. The nature of energy/mass.

                After all, the one thing most theists can agree on is that what ever produced all this is by definition god. So saying nature itself is god is a way to do exactly what Emile R is suggesting. That is pretty much the atheist stance if one thinks about it anyway.

                The true atheist does not disbelieve a god exists because that can not be proven any more than it can proven that there is one. So the strongest position for an atheist to take is lack of belief, rather than belief of lack.

                If you believe there is no god in any stronger way than just opinion, you are having faith and doing what Christians do. The one thing we atheists dislike is being told that atheism is a religion. But if we believe there is no god then they are right. We are dealing in speculation.

                We can not prove invisible pink squirrels or spaghetti monsters do not exist and it can not be proven they do unless  they show up and become visible. lol... So however silly it sounds, having faith they do not exist is speculation.

                However I do not believe they do exist nor do I believe the Christian god exists. I lack that belief. They have it, I lack it. I don't actively disbelieve it, because that is a belief without evidence and no better than believing in a god without there being any evidence. See what I mean?

                1. recommend1 profile image58
                  recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I do see.    But as there is no god then I have no need to have faith in its non-existence, it just is not.   Now I am ready to consider the manner in which everything came to be.  I am now ready to consider how man should develop morals from ethics, I am now ready to consider how to think about all those things that we do not know.


                  Your scientific pantheism starts with the premise of a god, and you are trapped in a cycle where a non-existent thing has control of your thinking process.

                  1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
                    Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Is nature a non-existent thing? Like you asked:  How did it all get here? I don't know. But it is more likely that energy is all there is and all there ever has been, then that there is a separate god out there that cares what we go do with ourselves.

                    I'm just saying nature qualifies as the same thing the christians call god. I'm not suggesting you call it god. I don't. And I don't suspect nature is a being or conscious in any way, so I am not stuck with an imaginary friend. wink

                    But I will point out to Christians that what they consider god, is actually nature. That does at times remove obstacles to discussions and avoids certain theist arguments. It tells them you accept the concept of something which produced all this so they don't have to try to convince you of it.

                    The argument takes a different road is all, and you can talk in ways they can better \understand, which was what Emile was talking about: Starting from a common word/concept. Wasn't it?

                    God is a tainted dirty word and I wish we could get rid of it. Perhaps we will some day.

      2. Levertis Steele profile image72
        Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        You said, "It demands you have faith a god exists, on penalty of eternal torture if you don't."

        Eternal torture? God is love, not eternally torturous. That is a misconception.

  7. mommygonebonkers profile image61
    mommygonebonkersposted 13 years ago

    Then we agree to disagree and (yes you will laugh and scoff and scorn me and I don't care) I will pray for you. God Bless!

  8. SlyMJ profile image61
    SlyMJposted 13 years ago

    Nice argument, Melissa. To continue the debate, I would say you never see the word Electricity walking around either, but electricity is out there, the same as any quantity you care to name, including 4.

    Religion, which I have no argument with, is many things to many people depending on what they believe, but 2 plus 2 is 4 whoever or wherever you are, even if you're a duck wondering where half your brood has gone.

    If we met with an intelligent alien species, you can be pretty sure than the fundamentals of maths and science would be the same for them as it is for us, though their cultures and beliefs might be unrecognisable.

    1. MelissaBarrett profile image59
      MelissaBarrettposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, but it's still applying an abstract concept to something concrete.  In the case of the duck, it is absence (subtraction) that we are trying to define.  The duck likely isn't counting, but noticing the lack of whole.

      Human beings needed a way to express ideas in a universal format and created mathematics as a way to deal with quantities. It succeeded in a purely concrete manner but still comes up short as a way of universal understanding.  Any conversation including numbers needs further information to achieve real meaning.  You can say 2+2=4 and the statement is true within the confines of mathematics but is completely worthless practically.  In essence, mathematics is the creation of a whole family of adjectives.  Ways of describing something ELSE.  It is the ELSE that exists, not mathematics.

      In the context of philosophy, with religion man has attempted to explain abstract using abstract.  The difference is the ELSE described by religion is non-visible while the Else described by mathematics is generally apparent.

      1. SlyMJ profile image61
        SlyMJposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, indeed. We need symbols to aid thinking and communication, and certain aspects of nature are entirely concrete, fundamental and easy to agree, for the most part.

        But I think you may be doing religion a disservice, calling it abstract. It seems it may be simply that no one can agree on what is valid evidence. For some it is personal experience, for some it is parts of religious scriptures, for others it is the entirety of a specific sacred text, and then there are those who recognise no evidence at all. Each religion differs from the other, and every religion has sub-divisions that also differ.

        Personally, I think a proven certainty about afterlife or God, one way or the other, would be a profoundly bad thing.

  9. SpanStar profile image61
    SpanStarposted 13 years ago

    SlyMJ

    MelissaBarrett

    Both of you have very interesting and compelling arguments, obvious someone went to school.

    I'm not here to challenge any one of your views I simply want to express

    Having the evidence, the proof as to the existence of God doesn't really matter because it's not about proof for those that don't believe in God and maybe for a few who do.

    Let's go back in time and see why this is true.  Jesus-the son of God did all these miracles in front of people, restoring sight to the blind, bring people back from death, walking on water and still his own disciples couldn't at least right away accept that he could be the son of God.

  10. profile image50
    paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

    Why do Christians use the Bible as evidence in Theological discussion?

    I think there is no harm in quoting Bible for some Theological discussion; but the person who quotes it should also present the wisdom if any , presented by Bible in the line of argument; otherwise it will be useless to quote from Bible.

    1. liftandsoar profile image61
      liftandsoarposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Right on, paarsurrey!

  11. KiandraRutledge profile image65
    KiandraRutledgeposted 13 years ago

    To me, both believing in God and believing in evolution calls for an amount of faith.  For one, we were not there at the beginning of creation to determine that the world actually came from a "big bang."  Based on our scientific logic, we assume that's the way it happened.  Again, no man has ever seen one species evolve into another species right before his eyes, although it's been suggested this has happen based on whatever  fossil evidence they claim to have.  I've seen fossil pics of things that suggest they were related to each other, but again, nothing has ever changed from one species to the next in the entire history of the belief in Evolution, and we're talking over a hundred years.  Not only has nothing changed, the process of one species evolving into another could not be reproduced in a laboratory. 
    Those who believe in God, may not see Him physically, but some say they feel his existence, and the others go on this logic: Outside of nature, all things have a designer or creator.  Mircowaves did not come from nothing, cars did not come from nothing, homes did not come from nothing.  So if these things needed a designer or creator, then maybe the things found in nature were created as well.  They didn't see the act of creation itself, but they believe that an intelligent designer was the one designed it all.
    Again, it's what you choose to believe.  I don't understand why a person's believe in a God would be of such concern for someone who doesn't believe in God?  People are free to believe what they want.  I've studied both creation and evolution, and evolution did not make a strong enough case for me.

    1. A Troubled Man profile image59
      A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Then, it's very obvious you didn't study evolution.

      1. GinaCPocan profile image62
        GinaCPocanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        If she attended public schools, she had to have studied Evaluation since a required study in schools of all levels. Its shoved down our throats. From what I read she wasn't combining Evaluation and the "Big Bang" anyway, she was merely using those as examples of faith, and it is faith because there is no real proof of either one.

        Trouble, you can't claim that on me cause I went Public School, and it was forced down my throat since the 4rth Grade. Your comments just remind me of a cranky old man with angina.

        Maybe that's why your a Troubled Man, who knows...

        1. A Troubled Man profile image59
          A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Didn't study any of that either, obviously.



          Personal insults in light of something intelligent and mature to say, well done. I hope you finish out the year and give Evaluation a chance. smile

    2. wilderness profile image76
      wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      A Troubled Man is correct - you didn't study evolution.  It sounds like you have read some of the rants from believers trying to convince others that it didn't happen,   but that's all.

      You seem to indicate that because no one witnessed the big bang then evolution is impossible, but those two things have no connection whatsoever.  One didn't cause the other, and there is no correlation at all.

      You go on to complain that no one has witnessed one species change to another in the past 100 years as proof that evolution doesn't work, but the very basic tenants of the concept deny that that can happen.  Had you studied the theory instead of swallowing whole the "arguments" of believers that do not understand themselves and whose sole desire is not to teach but to convince you of the impossibility you would know this.  If you watched a species for 10,000 times those hundred years you mention you [/i]might[/i] see a change.  No one I know of has done that.

      You go on to say that because man made things are made by man it is proof that God may have created the universe.  By using the identical logic, that termites build mounds, tidal waves build flat planes and volcanoes build islands all without intelligence it is proof that God is not needed.  Why do you not mention this as well?

      Yes, believers believe that God designed and built the universe (and it may be true) but offer no evidence that such happened.  Instead they declare, just as you have done, that "I'm ignorant of what happened, so I will believe what I want to".  The concern from others is when that belief spreads into all corners of life and the believer then insists (through force if necessary) that everyone believe the same and act accordingly.

      1. GinaCPocan profile image62
        GinaCPocanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        "A Troubled Man is correct - you didn't study evolution.  It sounds like you have read some of the rants from believers trying to convince others that it didn't happen,   but that's all."

        Nah, your both illogically wrong, as I pointed out, its a required subject in the schools.

        "You seem to indicate that because no one witnessed the big bang then evolution is impossible, but those two things have no connection whatsoever.  One didn't cause the other, and there is no correlation at all."

        They were examples, please reread.

        "You go on to complain that no one has witnessed one species change to another in the past 100 years"

        Complain? Why do you call her complaining? I read your posts, her complaints were just as much arguments as yours were...Why do you call her's complaints? Is it cause she is merely Christian?

        "no one has witnessed one species change to another in the past 100 years as proof that evolution doesn't work"

        it doesn't, in fact I will raise her 100 years to 2000 years, in fact, i will make it 4000 years.

        "Had you studied the theory instead of swallowing whole the "arguments" of believers that do not understand themselves and whose sole desire is not to teach but to convince you of the impossibility you would know this"

        WOW, this is a scream... This is physical proof of your attempt to  a believer to your personal belief system.

        "If you watched a species for 10,000 times those hundred years you mention you [/i]might[/i] see a change.  No one I know of has done that."

        Nope, no on has. No one has ever historically recorded it either, by observation nor inspiration. But, believers have a bible which is more like a Diary then a novel one poster said. Your on a literary site and you can't tell the difference? The book "Diary of Ann Frank", can be confused with a novel by some too who can't tell a diary from a novel.

        "You go on to say that because man made things are made by man it is proof that God may have created the universe.  By using the identical logic, that termites build mounds, tidal waves build flat planes and volcanoes build islands all without intelligence it is proof that God is not needed.  Why do you not mention this as well?"

        Why did you just twist her point? Geez. All she was pointing out was there is someone behind every creation. Termites building mounds only shows Gods creativity. He given all life a way to survive.Their bodies are constructed to suite their environment.

        "Yes, believers believe that God designed and built the universe (and it may be true) but offer no evidence that such happened."

        The evidence is there and in plain sight, you just refuse to see it because you want to challenge everything. So it wouldn't matter is I walked up to you holding hands with God himself and introduced him to you, it would still be up to you to accept what you see as real. Even if he stood there and turned a frog into a horse right before your eyes, you would still have to choose to believe what you just witnessed was real or a prank. So then how do we show you evidence when you have to decide if its real or not?

        "The concern from others is when that belief spreads into all corners of life and the believer then insists (through force if necessary) that everyone believe the same and act accordingly."

        I'm truly sorry sir, but no one forces Christianity these days, not like that. Those who try to force the bible down peoples throats ain't even practicing what the bible tells us. It says spread the WORD, not beat them with it, in fact, the bible tells us to do the contrary. It says to not try to change people, and it says we have freedom. Which means we have freedom to choose, and we do, it is up to the individual.

        1. A Troubled Man profile image59
          A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          That doesn't mean you studied and learned anything, it just means it was taught.

          1. GinaCPocan profile image62
            GinaCPocanposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            When you stick your head in a book for hours at a time, get quizzed repeatedly, assigned projects to enhance a particular subject, and is engaged in it, that's called studying, not taught Trouble...maybe you didn't go to school, maybe this is why your confused. You failed miserably at making your point. Just because I didn't see proof of these theories, doesn't support your conclusion I didn't study it. I didn't learn it cause it wasn't there.

            1. A Troubled Man profile image59
              A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Actually, I went to school and learned things and am not confused. The tell-tale signs in your post show well beyond a doubt you didn't learn those things.

              Science doesn't offer proofs, it offers evidence of which there is a mountain for Evolution and the Big Bang. Seems you learned very little at all, most likely due to the fact your religious beliefs sheltered you from the onslaught of an education being shoved down your throat.

        2. wilderness profile image76
          wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Well, I won't hit all your comments (it's getting too long) but here are a few answers:

          It may be required in some schools, but so is creationism.  It is often taught by a believer that doesn't understand a word of it; anyone teaching that we should see species evolution in less than hundreds of millenia is incompetent to teach the subject.  If you were taught that it should take place in 4000 years you had an idiot or an out and out liar for a teacher.

          She complained that no one had seen species evolution since the theory was outlined by Darwin.  That's a little over 100 years, just as she says.  If you, too, think that you should see it in less that a million years you too are sadly misinformed.  Your 4000 years is but a drop in the bucket.

          No, the bible is not a diary.  It is a combination of an attempt by ancient peoples to record their personal history and an attempt by those same barbaric people to explain the world around them without having the use of modern tools or the understandings we have obtained in the ensuing thousands of years.  In both cases it is sadly deficient in factual material.  Even the history part is mostly imagination and all of the supernatural bits.

          You missed the point of man building things.  Her comment indicated that it takes intelligence to do that; my examples show that to be false.  That you then claim God causes the termites to build mounds presupposes that God exists and caused creation; the very thing under discussion.  You assume the conclusion without needing any evidence or logical thought.

          You claim evidence but can't produce any that does not, in the same way, assume the conclusion first.  A tree is not evidence of God; it is evidence of a tree.

          Yes, Christianity is forced on us every time possible to do so.  Politically powerful religious groups force teaching religion whenever possible in schools.  They require prayer wherever they can.  They require that their religious icons be placed on every possible piece of public land.  They require that Gay people not be granted the same rights as they have as those Gays don't believe the same thing and live the same life style.  The list is nearly endless.

          Whether the bible says not to try to change people or not (many will disagree with you as they are required to proslytize) far, far too many religious people find it necessary to do just that.

  12. earnestshub profile image70
    earnestshubposted 13 years ago

    “According to the most common interpretation of biblical prophecy, Jesus will return only after things have gone horribly awry. Imagine the consequences if any significant component of the U.S. government believed that the world was about to end and that its ending would be glorious. The fact that nearly half of the American population apparently believes this should be considered a moral and intellectual emergency.”
    ― Sam Harris

    1. Slarty O'Brian profile image82
      Slarty O'Brianposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Sam sounds like he was or is a smart guy. lol..

      1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
        Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Hes a very rich young man now lol

      2. earnestshub profile image70
        earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        I would say that's right. smile


        Compare his mind to this.



        "Indeed, if you reject The Almighty and His Only Begotten Son, you have rejected decency and you have chosen to walk in darkness not unlike Mao, Stalin, Hitler, etc.. The only question is to what extent you will take your godlessness."




        Part of a long rant from a religious fanatic posting on my hub "The biblical god is a psychopath" thus explaining what a truly wonderful christian he was. lol

        I allowed the comment.

        Let everyone see for themselves, I couldn't insult him as much as he insults himself! lol

  13. earnestshub profile image70
    earnestshubposted 13 years ago

    “It is time that we admitted that faith is nothing more than the license religious people give one another to keep believing when reasons fail.”
    ― Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation

  14. profile image51
    goldenfire80posted 13 years ago

    GOD is real regardless.

    1. profile image51
      Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Must be nice to believe so blindly

  15. earnestshub profile image70
    earnestshubposted 13 years ago

    “When considering the truth of a proposition, one is either engaged in an honest appraisal of the evidence and logical arguments, or one isn't. Religion is one area of our lives where people imagine that some other standard of intellectual integrity applies.”
    ― Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation

  16. GinaCPocan profile image62
    GinaCPocanposted 13 years ago

    And you got your information from historical story books. If you don't believe in God, why do you continue to rant about it? You not going to change my beliefs. You can Christian bash till Obama puts on his tutu and dances in front of the cameras for all the world to see, your wasting your time, at leased with me.

    1. profile image51
      Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      History vs. Faith

      I think everyone can agree what wins out here.

      But the same thing can be asked of you. Why are you here?

      1. profile image51
        Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        But kudos for the typical response of theists who realize their beliefs are hugely illogical and primitive. I rest my case.

  17. earnestshub profile image70
    earnestshubposted 13 years ago

    Why do Christians use the Bible as evidence in theological discussions?


    What else do they have that they could use?

    The only way to do the god thing is the good old circular system. Bible = god's word = god proven.
    Same as most religion.

  18. profile image50
    paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

    Why do Christians use the Bible as evidence in theological discussions?

    It is alright to quote from Bible, if they also quote the wisdom if any from the Bible; otherwise it is no service of Bible.

  19. WD Curry lll profile image58
    WD Curry lllposted 13 years ago

    CS Lewis had the same take. He was an atheist. He studied the bible in order to disprove it. He became a believer and eventually wrote the "Skrew Tape Letters". When I becaame a believer, a friend of mine(Scientologist)recommended it to mr. it is a great read for anyone. It may not answere your question directly, but it will illuminate dynamics of the "Christian life" of your bumbling friends that is puzzling you.

    1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
      Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Similar to Lee Stroebel,a respected journalist and atheist.
      His wife became a Christian,and he was shocked (lol) so decided to investigate.
      His book "A Case For Christ" is a great read too!

      1. A Troubled Man profile image59
        A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        It's funny when Christians jump at headlines, "Atheist Becomes Believer!" without any knowledge whatsoever of the background or context and then use it to defend their faith.

        Yes, respected actors Tom Cruise and John Travolta both became Scientologists, too. Yah! lol

        1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
          Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Did you think my faith needed defending?

          Why do non-believers think there is a demon behind every tree lol

          1. Evolution Guy profile image59
            Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Non believers don't believe in demons. The detrimental effects of your irrational belief system are not the same as majikal demons. lol

            1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
              Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Of course they dont ,because then they would have to accept the reality of a Christ.


              No man is an island Mark-not even you.
              Just make sure the theories that prop you up offer you eternity.

              Oh that's right ,you dont believe in that either

              Oh dear ,so what do you believe in?

              Things that you can see,touch and feel.

              Reminds me of a 5yr old at the circus wink

              1. Evolution Guy profile image59
                Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Why do you always resort to meaningless cliches that you do not understand and then claim to know things wot is not real?

                Reminds me of a religionist blindly defending nonsensical beliefs. See how your religion is divisive? You are the one dividing yourself away. You. This is why religionists have been fighting - as you are - for so long.

                1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
                  Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Why do you whine, when you dont have an answer?

                  Why do you ask why?

                  And if you ask me one more time 'Are we there yet'? I am going to make you walk the rest of the way!

                  lol

                  1. Evolution Guy profile image59
                    Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Awww - How very condescending of you. Trust me - nothing you have said encourages me to follow you anywhere. Quite the opposite. Swallowing the placebo you have swallowed is not possible for me. Sorry - I need actual answers instead of repeating nonsense you do not understand by rote. Still - it is the easy option. wink

          2. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            And, the logic of a believing adult is the believing and acceptance of demons = the acceptance of Christ, as a reality. lol

            In that case, the 5yr old has a much firmer grip on reality than the adult.

            1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
              Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              ..I think you are correct.

              Ask a 5yr old who created the world-He doesnt know..

              Which is more honest -wink

              1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Once again, it is the 5yr old who is honest compared with the dishonest person asking a loaded question.

                1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
                  Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Its loaded? in what way?

                  1. A Troubled Man profile image59
                    A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Using the word, "Who" - that makes no sense. Instead, you would ask, "How did the universe form?"

  20. Yoda Speaks profile image58
    Yoda Speaksposted 13 years ago

    "Obviously if i'm an atheist and I don't believe in your God, why would I take your scriptures as evidence? That doesn't make any sense."

    To make what a stupid statement - evidence that, rediculous to pursue conversation with you, is it.

    Well have said, you might have "If I believe the world is flat and not round why would I take your evidence that it is round."  You make not any sense. \|/

  21. Maralexa profile image86
    Maralexaposted 13 years ago

    Lee Strobel is a Christian, he bacame an atheist in college because he couldn't answer the main issues people have with Christianity.  Why is God so cruel?  Why is belief in Christ the only way to God?  If God really created the universe why does science lead so many people to believe that unguided evolution accounts for life?  If the miracles of God contradict science then how can a rational person believe they are true?  etc. 


    Strobel's The Case for Faith provides excellent answers to these and other similar questions held by many atheists.  And, as Eaglekiwi says, Strobel's book A Case for Christ, shows that real evidence exists, scientifically authenticated, that Christ not only lived but he rose from the dead.  Evidence, again scientifically authenticated, shows that the scriptures written by the writers of the New Testament, are true and demonstrate they are not just historical myth.

    1. ErosRyder profile image62
      ErosRyderposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Where is this evidence?

      Buddha
      Krishna
      Odysseus
      Romulus
      Dionysus
      Zarathustra
      Attis
      Horus

      All share the same characteristics as Jesus Christ. They all predate him also. So how could he be the one and only savior when there have been many before him.

      1. liftandsoar profile image61
        liftandsoarposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        None of them rose from the dead and appeared to over 300 folks.

        1. earnestshub profile image70
          earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          “People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a person’s faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next.”
          -- Sam Harris

      2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
        Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Eros... Jesus is only one who died for our sin of unbelief. They all died for themselves.

        1. Evolution Guy profile image59
          Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          LOLOLOL

          So - if Jesus died for the "sin" of not believing garbage - surely we do not need to believe garbage any more?

          1. Don Crowson profile image59
            Don Crowsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            How true.  He died so that you would not believe garbage. He died so that you would know the truth and the truth would set you free. Supposedly he said that himself, and if you know the truth, you will not believe garbage.

            1. profile image51
              Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Horus did the same. And he predates Christ.

              Shouldn't you believe in Horus instead?

  22. ErosRyder profile image62
    ErosRyderposted 13 years ago

    But the Sun also shares the characteristics as Jesus Christ.  It's all metaphorical.

    I don't doubt ones faith. It's what  people need to make them feel that there is something bigger out there. I myself have a belief and faith.

    1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
      Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      That's good Eros, if we debate and argue on which god etc, the argeuing itself detracts from the love of Christ.

      So,like the scriptures encourages:
      'Whatsoever is good, whatsoever is pure,whatsoever is loving,hold true to these tings' wink

  23. profile image50
    paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

    Books should be quoted only if they give some wisdom or valid reason to do a thing.

  24. SpanStar profile image61
    SpanStarposted 13 years ago

    The Bible is evidence to believers not nonbelievers.

    Groups that come together like fraternities or sororities they create certain guidelines which they expect theirs members to follow. The Bible has rules which will pertain only to its members.

    1. Cagsil profile image68
      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      If that's the case then it shouldn't apply to ALL people who don't believe? Which isn't the case in any believers eyes.

    2. earnestshub profile image70
      earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      In that case, does your god only reach the converted? Preach to the choir? What a puny little narrow-minded god!

      1. SpanStar profile image61
        SpanStarposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Earnestshub,
           Truly it's useless to tell you anything because for at least a year that I know of you see everything only from your prospective but for those who actually might want to know- preaching is to the choir for they need up lifting at time but it's also for those who are sincerely interesting in learning about the Christian faith.

        1. earnestshub profile image70
          earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Rubbish! A bunch of the religiously handicapped use hubpages forums to flog their beliefs in an invisible fairy from a mad myth. smile

          What could you possibly have to say that people haven't heard a thousand times?

        2. A Troubled Man profile image59
          A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          We can find out ourselves the Christian faith, we don't need you to tell us just because you want to tell us. You see, that shows you aren't interested in anyone else but yourself.

  25. WD Curry 111 profile image57
    WD Curry 111posted 13 years ago

    You asked. Don't take my word for it. Like the bible says . . . let every man be found a liar. Ask God. I mean, really ask God. What get's lost in the shuffle is that God is Love. Not the love you have, real Love. When you are alone, go into your place. I don't care how you do it or what your attitude is. Sincerely ask God to let you know he loves you. I don't think there is a worry that one doesn't believe. Faith is a gift. If you don't have it, all you have to do is ask.

    How long will your answer take? How will you know it is God? I don't know. If God is really who the bible says he is, he knows your need and can speak for himself. So . . .  get out of my face!

    Watch out for American Christians, most of them are crazy. Peace, brother.

    1. earnestshub profile image70
      earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The "god" you speak of. would that be the hateful psycho from the bible?

      Religious "love" is conditional love, or more accurately, not love at all.

      1. Jerami profile image58
        Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        I onlygot a little bit ...   beore I gotta go ...   so I'll just get down with what I wanna say.



            Earnest ;  ?,   you ain't really mad at GOD,   You studied it all,  you know in your heart of hearts!    You ain't madf at GOD!   You are mad about everything that religiousity says about  HIM!


            ME    TOO!

        1. earnestshub profile image70
          earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Well, I must say I find most of what I see on the religious hubs to be contemptible and directed at control, so we agree at least a bit. smile

          How anyone could love the biblical god is beyond me.

      2. WD Curry 111 profile image57
        WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Earnest, I thought I told you to ask him and get out of my face. I also told you to watch out for American Christians. You are a slow learner!

        1. Cagsil profile image68
          Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Ask Him? Who?

          You act as if the god you worship actually exists? And, is willing to listen to you?

          You do realize only the gullible think like that? hmm

          1. Jerami profile image58
            Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            You know as well as I do.      As soon as you stop foolong yourself;  you can talk to me about it "IF"     you like.    ?

            1. Cagsil profile image68
              Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              I haven't a clue.
              Fooling myself? WOW! Really Jerami. I told you before, there's nothing about myself I don't know about, because I've gone places inside myself, people like yourself are afraid to go.

              Sorry, no connection to a god and as everyone else already knows, there's no external god, that's for sure. Everyone makes the same claim that the god of religion is a spirit and doesn't reside in reality.

              And, as I've said before- anyone gullible enough to believe in spirit or spirituality is intellectually dishonest with themselves, which means, they are also dishonest with the people they come into contact with.

              So, what exactly did you want to talk to me about?

          2. Eaglekiwi profile image72
            Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            ..No,the blind and deaf think like that (metorphorically)

        2. earnestshub profile image70
          earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Not a slow learner, just slow at taking instructions from god botherers is all. smile

  26. WD Curry 111 profile image57
    WD Curry 111posted 13 years ago

    Cagsil, you are hung up on semantics. What you seek is too deep for words. The entire creation is groaning and so are you. Peace!

    1. Cagsil profile image68
      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Hung up on semantics? Naw...semantics isn't it at all. Irrationality? Yeah, that's it.

      1. Jerami profile image58
        Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Cagsil   ....   DO?  you know why you do and say the things that you do   ?    i do.

            And you say that you do !    ain't that right?

        1. Cagsil profile image68
          Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Semantics isn't it at all Jerami. Irrationality is what I address.

          Edit: And, YES! I know why I do and say what I do. Completely.

          1. Jerami profile image58
            Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            It is OK if you believe that to be true.    You do know that don't you?

               sure you do.    We All do!

            1. Cagsil profile image68
              Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Nice try. It's not a belief. I know exactly why I say specific things and why I act in a specific manner and why I live.
              Again, there's nothing about myself I don't know.
              Is this your way of telling me that my ego has me in it's grips? I certainly hope not, considering I've learned to recognize it and see past it.

              1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Cagsil, Oh yeah.
                response to arguing with AEvans.
                Baby in utero. Sperm and egg will die if God would not furnish inner man (spirit and soul). Without God all die. But He is life and alive and giver of life.

                1. Cagsil profile image68
                  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Conjecture. roll

                2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                  A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  And, you know this how?

  27. suzettenaples profile image91
    suzettenaplesposted 13 years ago

    The Bible is based on faith, not on fact.  It is man's interpretation of what has happened in the past.  It is biased information and opinion.  When I taught literature in public high school and we read novels or poems with allusions to something in the Bible, we always taught and instructed our students that the Bible is based on faith, not fact.  We are not able to teach fact from the Bible.  No one can.  You may think you can and you are, but you are only fooling yourself.

    1. Edwinoel Tanglao profile image60
      Edwinoel Tanglaoposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I agree Suzette, and that God being in Spirit, He can be better understood in our hearts and spirit.  Try looking up on Near Death Experiences and you will see how some doctors and even some scientists may be able to explain on the consciousness of the spirit in a lifeless body or a clinically dead body.

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        lol lol

  28. earnestshub profile image70
    earnestshubposted 13 years ago

    “In the year 2006, a person can have sufficient intellectual and material resources to build a nuclear bomb and still believe that he will get seventy-two virgins in Paradise.”
    ― Sam Harris

  29. lucieanne profile image75
    lucieanneposted 13 years ago

    No-one will ever know if God exists, all they can do is 'believe' one thing or the other. Just because something has been written in a book, which quite frankly I think reads like a book of fairy-tales, doesn't mean it's 'divine inspiration'. I have tried several times to make some sense of it, but I can't see how it can be true. My common sense tells me that it cannot possibly be the work of 'God' because if it was, it wouldn't contradict itself so much.
    I agree that some of it could be used for teaching morals and a 'clean' lifestyle, but I'm against being threatned with the fires of hell and damnation if I don't comply. If we are all God's creation, he will be well aware of our imperfections and will take into account our 'human-ness when we have to stand before him.
    Knowing the fundamental rights from wrongs is something that comes from good parenting, whether you've had a so-called good Christian upbringing or not. Considering Caine and Abel were allegedly the sons of the first people on the planet - who supposedly had a lot to to with God himself,- they obviously weren't all that religious themselves for one to slaughter the other! Surely someone told them it was a sin to murder, but one of them still did it.
    How big was the arc that Noah allegedly built? Has anyone considered how big it would have to be to hold two of every species on the planet? And even if it was, where did the food chain fit in to this story? There must have been one hell of a bloodbath on board that arc, or what the hell did they all eat?

    But to go back to the beginning - 'In the beginning...' to be precise, the world and everything on it was (again allegedly) made in six days. But then some 'learned' scholars tell us that it's not literally six days. So who's the smart ass who came up with this little gem? If that little snippet could be wrong, how much more is fiction? To quote 2 Timothy Chapter 3 vs 16 - 'All scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for teaching' (depending on which version you're reading, but it amounts to the same), so if you believe one bit, you have to believe it all. I personally believe that it is too flawed to be 'God inspired', but that doesn't stop me from believing in a divine entity
    I choose not to accept Jesus as a half God - half man being. I believe there was a radical human (probably not even called Jesus) who lived and died for his beliefs, who truly believed in a better world for the human race, but wasn't quetzalcoatl doing the same thing half way round the world at approximately the same time? Christianity didn't start at the death of Jesus, it took another 300 years to come into it's own, and since then people have killed and died for this person. What happened to us all being equal 'in the eyes of the Lord'? Would a truly loving 'God' want his people (who He evidently lovingly created) to murder each other for his sake?
    As a child grows and develops an understanding of the world he is brought up in the religion of his parents, and because his parent's might be Christian or Muslim or Jewish or whatever, he is influenced by their beliefs to such a degree that he believes that THAT is the only way to live. But they can't ALL be right can they? The only common denominator is the belief in a divine entity.
    ALL religion is flawed, and none of us will ever know which one is the right one. But if anyone can tell me that they are TRULY living their lives by the book and are enjoying their time on planet Earth, and not just marking time, waiting for the big day, then I'd love to know how they're managing it.

    1. Cagsil profile image68
      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      It's just foolish to think that an omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent god would "need" worshipers and praise.

      It's just as foolish to think that an omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent god would lower itself to the lowest human emotion "jealousy" for any reason.

      I guess only the gullible can rationalize the stupidity for the sake of being comfortable. lol

      1. lucieanne profile image75
        lucieanneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        I agree!

      2. earnestshub profile image70
        earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        These things stand out about the "word" ......that and all the threats. Threats are not made by the potent.

        1. WD Curry 111 profile image57
          WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I think you drink too much! Every Australian I have ever met over here couldn't back  his big mouth! One exception - Peter  Townsend. We had an awesome session at Spanish House and he reported to Surfer Mag that it was as good as anywhere in the world at that size. I smoked all of them on my 6'8 Greg Lohr fun shape. Twin fins were  bogging! You can take a walk about, dufus!

          1. earnestshub profile image70
            earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I think you have a narrow minded view of a world you have never seen or understood, and that Australian stereotype is older than I am. 

            Personal attacks accusing people of insobriety while they can still wipe the floor with you daily is just a tad more than presumption don't you think?

            How many Australians do you know? I am 5th Generation and I don't see any drunks anywhere in my life.

            For your information I am such a moderate drinker I have been know to go from Xmas to Xmas without an alcoholic drink.

            The problem with having no arguments and resorting to public abuse is you have to find something that is truthful to make it stick, otherwise you wind up looking like an ignorant fool with a chip on their shoulder.

            1. WD Curry 111 profile image57
              WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Earny, lighten up. It was a joke. You didn't appreciate the Peter Townsend reference? It was a tip off that I was a surfer. I thought you would get a kick out of it. I thought Australins love surfing . . .is that a stereotype? HeI started a forum challenging Atheists to prove that God doesn't exist. Big Brother made me sit in the corner for getting too wold. After 3 days I arose.

              Maybe I better break it down for you . . . Jesus rose on the third day. Get it?

      3. Eaglekiwi profile image72
        Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        So youre not an atheist Cags-yea right lol


        Look dont feel bad, I think you pointed out on another thread how a certain new hubber would find favour with the religionists-which I would accept.

        Just noting that I guess like minds do agree with each other. Its envitable

        1. Cagsil profile image68
          Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          No I'm not an Atheist. I have no religious beliefs.

          And your point? If you have one that is?

          1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
            Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Well God knows yer heart ,and thats enough for me, Sir Smarty Pants.

      4. WD Curry 111 profile image57
        WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Cagssil - That's good. I have no religious beliefs. Well put. Why do you feel compelled to challenge those who do, I am not joking. You are more dedicated to your non-belief than most are to their's I am abeliever and I wonder why God doesn't just call people who have as much zeal as you do'

    2. Eaglekiwi profile image72
      Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      One day at a time,and when things are really tough its on an hourly basis lol


      No ,seriously, the whole deal whispers hope ,when if ya think about it,there is none (in this world) smile

  30. davenmidtown profile image69
    davenmidtownposted 13 years ago

    It seems to me that people think there must be just one answer for questions like this.  I consider my relationship with god to be an individual account.  As such, it applies to me.  If I choose to use the bible as an institution of knowledge then so be it.  If you choose to ignore the bible and think of it as a pack of lies, etc ... then so be it. religion is a matter of faith... individual faith.  As such, why wouldn't christian's use the bible as evidence in theological discussions (personally I would call it an argument) it is a matter of faith... whether we accept that or not... What you believe is entirely  up to you.  What I believe is entirely up to me.  If you'd like to discuss what I believe just ask... but I wont burden you with the thought that what I believe is a one-size-fits-all answer to everything about god.  That is a discussion that I will have with god... because that is my faith.

  31. profile image0
    gnikposted 13 years ago

    "Obviously if i'm an atheist and I don't believe in your God, why would I take your scriptures as evidence? That doesn't make any sense."

    It is good to hear that you are an atheist.  As a Christian I encourage everyone to make a decision regarding how they experience realtiy and what they think about it because I think that these types of issues affect our quality of life.  To say that you do not believe in God is much better than to be one who just "goes along" because many others believe.  It is much better than simply ignoring that issue and going through life without thought about the nature of the universe, why it is here?, the nature of mankind?, What makes a good life? and a whole host of other questions.

    As a Christian, I never offer Scripture as evidence of God.  Many may do this, but not all.


    "Not to mention the bible has this nasty ideal that everything in it is true because God said its true."

    It is dangerous to generalize about the Bible.  The Bible is a collection of individual books by many different authors.  Each book within the Bible has its own purpose, history, perspective, and theology.  You statement might apply to parts of some of the books, but maybe not all.  It would be an interesting study to see if your statement holds true.  How many of the books in the Bible have you read to find out if your claim is true?

    "If it were that simple, everyone could publish a book and say God said everything is true and if you don't believe it you're going to Hell."

    Well, it is my observation that life is not simple.  There are many complicated topics addressed in the books of the Bible.  Hate, love, death, murder, justice, peace, reconciliation, forgiveness.....and so on.  Many of these topics do not fit very well into the the two categories of "true" or "untrue".  They are complicated topics.  Whether one believes in God or not and whether one is interested in the contents of the Bible or not, I encourage every person to examine their own life for the purpose of living the best life that is possible.

    Peace to all.

    1. dfbishopsr profile image59
      dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I can tell many who post here have not spent much of their lives studying the scripture and comparing life to what it says. First I would like to say that I have spent nearly 30,000 hours in the last 35 years studying the Bible from cover to cover. There is not a statemnt made in it that my life does not filter throught o see how it compares to what scripture is saying. What I have found is that what scripture says is always validated by everyday life. I have also discovered that the 66 books canonized as the Word of God (Bible) are indeed in harmony with one another. I have found nothing but congruity and continuity in all my years of study. It is impossible for me to believ that man authored this book without the direct inspiration and oversight of God Himself. We can intellectualize God and the Bible and know doubt from human rationale God can be dispelled. But those who truly have given their heart to God through faith in His Son Jesus, know, by experience, the reality of God. It is in fact the only way to prove His existence. BUT, those who choose to disbelieve do not escape His notice because they do not believe. Unbelief does not alter the fact (s). I can no nothing of gravity, never heard of it, don't believe in it, but when I steb off the roof of my house I will soon become a believer. My unbelief of gravity won't change it's reality.

  32. Eaglekiwi profile image72
    Eaglekiwiposted 13 years ago

    The statement really should be:

    Why would a Christians NOT use the Bible as evidence?

    It provides answers that the so far the world has not.

    It is for ALL mankind.

    1. wilderness profile image76
      wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Answers with no truth or that don't match reality have not proven to be of much value overall, although they very often provide that "good feeling" that we all like and enjoy.

      1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
        Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Many people judge the bible from an emotional point of view  or an intellectual angle.
        But unlike reading a good book it never the less is still around and still the best selling book throughout history.

        That tells me its more than a feel good book...( actually many athiests dont get that 'feel good feeling' ever) lol

        1. profile image0
          jomineposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Right, it should not be seen from an intellectual angle, there is  no intellect in it!! lol

          Best selling of course, not most read!


          Feel good, of course, if you enjoy violence. But if you read Charles Dickens or Harry Potter, the feelings are better!!

          1. Eaglekiwi profile image72
            Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Sure if youre 12yrs old lol

            1. profile image0
              jomineposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              I have rarely seen a christian who has read bible!!! 12 years might try to read it, as there are stories, but you should not give it to a child, there is more sexism, pornography and violence in it, than any other book.

          2. WD Curry 111 profile image57
            WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Ask yourself this Jomine why am I compelled to harrass people for their belief. If it is not for you, that is cool with me. We can sit down and watch the sunset together.. It will look the same to both of us.

  33. profile image0
    gnikposted 13 years ago

    jomine, When you "see" a Christian, how can you tell if he has read the Bible or not?  In the Christian churches, schools, and seminaries that I have been to, everyone who could read, read the Bible.  Maybe you meant "read the WHOLE Bible".  Fewer Christians have actually read the WHOLE Bible, first of all, because there is some dispute over what makes up the WHOLE Bible.  So one would have to define which collection of written works you were referring to before you could judge as to whether a person had read all of them.  Second, some of the written works in the Bible are more obscure and difficult to understand than others.  Many of these obscure parts are not read as often as others.  That is not unusual.  I skip over parts of books all of the time.

    As to sexism, I would agree that what modern man would call sexism does appear in the Bible.  Undoubtedly, violence is described in the Bible.  Pornography is harder to define.  Some say that, regarding pornography, that one will know it when they see it.  All that I can say is that I have never seen any pornography in the Bible.

    Regarding the claim that there is MORE in the Bible than in any other book, I can only say that I have NEVER read EVERY book so I do not think that I could objectively make that claim.

    1. profile image0
      jomineposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I meant the book available to them. Very few had read the entire new testament, let alone the entire books.(In a very religious society, the opposite may be the case, but most part of my life I was in liberal society, and has found very few hard core religious people). And how many can really quote a bible sentence(I don't mean accurately, all they have is, what they heard in church or catechism classes)


      I had mentioned two books before as typical "feel good" books and was referring to that.

      1. WD Curry 111 profile image57
        WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        I've read it at least 30 times. come talk to me.

  34. Rocko Polo profile image57
    Rocko Poloposted 13 years ago

    Saying that conditional love is no love at all is like saying that parents who make rules for their own children's well-being don't love their children. It makes more sense to say that permissive parenting which let's kids run into trouble because of inexperience is no love at all. Bounderies are there to protect just as laws of our governments are there to protect. If a government has no laws it invites anarchy and anarchy results in the strong harming the weak.

    1. Cagsil profile image68
      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The strong still harms the weak, even with government and laws in place. So your argument is not true. However, if people were in fact told the truth about life, then there would be no reason to worry about the strong and weak, because more people would realize that life isn't about just them, as it is now, but is about something outside themselves.

      1. Rocko Polo profile image57
        Rocko Poloposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        My statement that laws are useful in protecting the weak is not true. Then you must live in some other universe.

        1. Cagsil profile image68
          Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          No I don't live in some other Universe, as you put it. All laws do is hand out consequences. And had you understood that, then you would know laws don't actually protect anyone.

        2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
          Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Then what is law for? Rocko?

  35. Cammie 1016 profile image59
    Cammie 1016posted 13 years ago

    I definitley think that God could do this. But what have we as humans done to deserve it? Most of our world revolves around money now-a-days. So let the hunger around the world unite us to become a better nation and world in that.....

    1. Cagsil profile image68
      Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      How does a baby in a starving country deserve to be starving?

      1. dfbishopsr profile image59
        dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        God gave you and I and evryone else the will and right to make choices in life; He does not violate that will therefore we as humans, now, and in centuries past, have made decisions that effect us and the world around us, and sometimes even the whole world. So we cannot accuse God. Unless of course one expects Himm to make us all robots with no will nor choice.

        1. Cagsil profile image68
          Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          But, that post still doesn't answer the question, it only distracts from it. Good show on you and your sad attempt to defend your belief in a god.

          So, again....how does a baby that is starving NOT deserve help? If a child prays to their god for food, but gets none, then what does that say about their god?

          This time, try answering the question.

        2. A Troubled Man profile image59
          A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Then, by the same logic, you cannot praise God either.

      2. WD Curry 111 profile image57
        WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Cagsil - On the starving baby thing. Things like this are the biggest challenge to my faith. I worked as a Voc instructor at an adolescent mental health facility for severely emotionally disturbed for 10 years. Suffice it to say that I saw some good arguments for demon possession. I won't even go into the condition of victims of unimaginable abuse.  I asked God what that was all about, but I guess he didn’t feel a need to explain it to me. All I know is . . . I did everything I could to help . . . he woke me up every day and gave me the strength to go back in there and endure the madness. How about you?  Your mantra is to help people and you are over here wasting your time with malicious mischief. Take the child some food for crying out loud!

      3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
        Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Oh, Cagsil, it is bothering me that you never read (looks like). The poverty is curse, and curse was release from sin of unbelief. Read Deuteronomy 28:15-68.

    2. Marsden4 profile image74
      Marsden4posted 13 years ago

      I like your answer dfbishopsr. Its a great argument to bring up every time someone accuses Christians of having an authoritarian God.

      1. Evolution Guy profile image59
        Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Quite right. I am glad he agrees god does not come down and interfere in any way shape or form with earth. No miracles, no majik, no nothing.

        Almost like he does not actually exist.

        Oh, wait.............................. lol

        1. dfbishopsr profile image59
          dfbishopsrposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          You add to what I say to suite your own mockery of God. You add explatives to heighten what you think and refuse intelligible response - perhaps because you have no other recourse. When one lacks substance of thought the only thought they can generate is explatives, which carry no challenge the reason nor logic of the mind, but serve only to stir emotion.

        2. htarticchio profile image70
          htarticchioposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          the truth is, all life is based on faith.  Faith that our perceived reality is our actual reality and even that reality itself something to be grasped.  Infact, the only thing that can actually be proven is the existence of the mind...in otherwords, "I think therefore I am" (Descartes).  Everything beyond that is a concept we have all chosen to agree upon.  Have you ever wondered if your idea of purple, and the color you call purple, is the same color your neighbor sees as purple?  yes, we have all agreed that the color our parents pointed to at a young age and said "purple" to is now purple, but you could very well be seeing the color someone else sees as yellow and calling it purple because that is what you were trained/molded to do.  Both science and religion take a great deal of faith.  In fact, many scientific truths are based on things we cannot actually see, but observe through experience, such as negative/pos ions, etc.  To say God does not exist based merely on the fact that he is not visible is ignorant.  I experience God much like you experience gravity.  Again, something that is not visible to the naked eye, but is something that inevitably affects us whether we choose to believe in its existence or not.  The same can be said for math.  Evolution Guy was correct in stating that math would exist whether or not someone believed in its existence...but then, so does God.  The truth is, not amount of arguing will make someone who doesn't want to believe in God change their mind...or vice versa.  In the end, it all depends on what you choose to believe and the consequences that go along with that choice.  Believing in God is easy, following him is not.  This is where most people make the distinction.  To believe in God means one must accept that they are no longer in control, they are not the most important thing in this world and therefore they must give up a certain amount of power to God.  As selfish beings, we don't want to give up this power, so we simply reject God so that we can continue living our lives as we wish without consequence.  Sadly, in the end, a world without God ends up being a world without meaning or direction.  In fact, one of the most well known Atheists in history believed that our inevitable end without a greater power and without a constant made up feeling of worth is suicide (Neitzche and Nihilism).  So, whether or not you choose to follow God is your choice, but in the end, he doesn't need your faith to exist.

          1. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            That is both obviously and patently false. We all experience gravity, it has an effect and can be measured whereas your invisible God has no effect and cannot be measured.



            In other words, you will always make obvious and patently false claims in order to make sure you never change your mind.



            Again, obviously and patently false. There are plenty of places on Earth where they don't believe in your God but are doing fine, thank you very much.

            Seems dishonesty is the true faith of believers.

            1. htarticchio profile image70
              htarticchioposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              I don't expect you to understand how God is as real and measurable as gravity, because you claim he doesn't exist...just as you say I will make false claims in order to never change my mind, you will always find an excuse as to why my reasons are not valid.  And your idea of "fine" for those places in the world that do not believe in my God is very different than my idea of fine.  Am I saying that man cannot live without God?  No...man obviously can live without God and succeed in this world without him.  In fact, God himself was rejected by this world when he lived here.  But I believe in something greater than my seventy plus years on Earth.  I believe in an eternal existence that stretches far beyond my life here on Earth.  You don't have to believe what I believe, nor do you have to accept that what I believe to be true is in fact real.  But just as I could never prove God, you can never disprove him.  And yes, God is as real as gravity.  God makes miracles happen everyday...babies being born, the sun rising, the world turning.  You may call all of this science, and yes, science can measure and try to explain how the world works, but science cannot create anything as complex as this world no matter how long it tries.  It can manipulate it, use it, claim it as its own...but in the end, even science is a result of man's intellect and man one of God's creations.

              1. htarticchio profile image70
                htarticchioposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Also, if we want to talk to dishonesty, then we may as well throw science out altogether, because so many scientific ideas, theories, etc. have been proven false over time.  But that is the convenience of science, it is allowed to make mistakes...whereas Christians cannot or they are forever condemned as liars.

                1. Evolution Guy profile image59
                  Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  That is because there is a distinction to be made between liars and scientists with a working hypothesis that needs to be adapted given new evidence.

                  Or - are you saying the Word Of God is adaptable to new evidence? lol

                  Liars for Jesus(TM)

                2. Cagsil profile image68
                  Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Your logic is faulty. Real science discovers things through a process. Scientists who only use theory and nothing else are frauds.

                3. profile image51
                  Rabgixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Probably because in the scientific community you need empirical evidence and tests to establish something. As new knowledge unfolds, old theories and processes become moot.

                  Phrenology and Lemarck anyone?

              2. A Troubled Man profile image59
                A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                You have no reasons in which to weigh validity, you have only your faith based claims covered with dishonesty.



                Notice how that is not a reason, an argument or even something that remotely makes sense when we replace the word "God" with "pink dragons".



                lol

                 

                Attempting to vilify science with faith based dishonesty only shows how weak your reasons are for believing in God.

            2. WD Curry 111 profile image57
              WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Troubled man - That was good how you could absorb all of that to process it. I think I know what the guy was saying but it was too much to process in the forum. Here's how I do it. I read the bible. I have memorized a lot of it, but I don't think you should go verbatim. It should just be part of your being. See, the way most Christians treat the bilble. you would think the bible itself was God.

          2. Evolution Guy profile image59
            Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry you don't understand that the FSM Rules!

            There is no god and my life still has meaning. Far more meaning than yours.

            Oh well - at least I do not start conflicts and wars agin ther unbeeleber.

            Liars For Jesus(TM)

            1. WD Curry 111 profile image57
              WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Liars for Jesus? That would be me! The bible says let every man be found a liar. Only God is true.I had to  be born again, brother. Like the Jamaicans say . . . I was a dead man walking. Here are some instructions from the bible, "Do not wrangle about words. It leads to the ruin of the hearer."

              I'll tell you what. Here's what we should do. This freaking program is off the hook! Do you realize how powerful it is? You guys think some human is runnng it, but it is on autopilot while big brother is out playing golf. We can do anything ee want with this hotrod. I am an artist I am allergic to quark. You guys seem pretty smart to me and i love you no matter whatyou believe. See god told me you were alright and he has it handled. He doesn't get shook about smart people thinking. Don't hate the dull ones who just nod there head and go along.

              You don't know who I am andwhy I am here. Why sit around bantering dipwallow when we got the talent to integrate my graphic stuff with this bad boy? You don't see it, but someone has us playing hula hoop when we could be the answere to a lot of problems. Yopu ain't gonna change my mind, and I like you just the way you are. I want to start world class art related business with a strong vocational component.can you get on board with me? I am super gifted at working with hard cases. I can even get them to pull up pants when they wanted to fight everyone else. I would say,'Pull up your pants, your brains are showing"

              1. Evolution Guy profile image59
                Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Good. Stop pushing your impossible, irrational Invisible Super Being because it causes so many conflicts when you do -  and we are good to go. Sorry if it bothers you that I am honest because you misread that the bible wants you to be a liar and therefore break one of the commandments, and do not understand why promoting lying instead of honesty is causing issues in our society, not to mention completely contradicting and invalidating your majik book and god hypothesis.

                I am honest - I know this bothers religious people - but I personally think we should hold ourselves to ethical and moral standards in order to try and live in harmony. Would you be prepared to try being honest for a change? See if it causes less conflicts?

                Thanks for keeping it real in future.

        3. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
          Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Evolution..., atheists have only 50% functional brain cells. (This is only estimation). I will tell you why. Christians believe in natural and supernatural. Atheists believe only natural. Since what we see is only sliver of what we do not see, who know what real percentage is.

    3. Levertis Steele profile image72
      Levertis Steeleposted 13 years ago

      I'd rather be a hopeful and faithful Christian who may reap the promises of that Bible rather than an atheist who may regret his/her decision. What do I have to lose? I am not a big gambler. Another plus from that Bible: He gives you free will. You have a God-given right to be an atheist. Freedom is so sweet, I think!

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Interesting statement.
        But, what about what you don't do here for others? Don't you think that your god would take that into account within the judgment it/he/she is going to place upon you?
        Apparently you're a bigger gambler than you might think.
        Actually you've no proof of that. It's taken on faith. However, every person who is born has a will and it's free because there was NOT a cost for it.
        It's a right regardless of whether or not a god exists. Go figure you wouldn't understand that.

        1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
          Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Cagsil. The family is cell of the nation. We are responsible to take care of family not entire world and especially mess they created. It is very unfair to demand pay for mistakes, who are abusing the natural God's Law.  By the way we do more charity than communists do. Communists know only how to kill in rebellion and revolution.

          1. Cagsil profile image68
            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            You know, religious folk are more ignorant than ever before in history. You people continue to talk about how "WE" are supposedly all "God's" children. This makes everyone family and yet you make a pathetic statement like you did above. See, it goes to show you talk the talk, but refuse to walk the walk. So, with that said- get real.

          2. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I've seen severe detachment from reality, but these posts would place quite high in the running.

            lol

        2. Levertis Steele profile image72
          Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I do not know how you were able to judge me when you do not know anything about me except the few statements I have made. In your own words, "Actually you've no proof of that."

          You said, "Go figure you wouldn't understand that." I have noticed that skeptics or atheists are almost always full of anger, impatience, and insults. I can see the honesty, but I do not see the morality. I also do not understand why you make an effort to converse with people who cause you disgust.  What do you have to offer that is better than Christianity? What does a person have to look forward to by listening to you? Where are you trying to lead others? If there is no God, our deaths will end evertyhing, right? If Christians are ignorant, then their deaths will end everything, right? No one will be able to say, "I told you so!" Right? So, what is your point? your purpose? Whose laws do you use to determine honesty and standards of morality? Are you assuming that everyone has built-in senses of these traits? "Actually you've no proof of that."

      2. A Troubled Man profile image59
        A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        A lifetime of living in a false reality paying heed to invisible non-existent entities, losing all form of respect, honesty and dignity for yourself.

        1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
          Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          A Troubled Man, have you ever seen your brain? One does not see, it’s not exist, right?

          1. A Troubled Man profile image59
            A Troubled Manposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            lol You're joking, right? A five year old would call that the weakest argument ever presented to defend the existence of a god. Seriously.

            lol

            1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
              Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              A troubled Man. Let me give you reasoning sample. Two 5 years old boys are going to build building with lego. They have some simple plan according to age.  Did ever occurs to you that they did not have in build evil plan attached to it? How to destroy the building?  Or let say building radio by adults. Where the complex evil came from? Or seed of it?  Simple evolution would not have any evil plan. Behind each plan there is person, planer, and designer. Do not tell me nonsense that jet plain occurred by itself. But bacteria, or man has the structure millions complex than Jet plane. Some atheists have really narrow mind.

              1. Cagsil profile image68
                Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                This statement shows your own lack of understanding of life itself. Good show. wink

    4. Levertis Steele profile image72
      Levertis Steeleposted 13 years ago

      Oh, yes. Nature and all of its components provide the best evidence of a Creator. Try accidenting upon just one creation and see what you can create without using God's creations that are already here. This is no accident. There is too much perfection and order and too many working systems. Consider the orderly solar system and the just-right distance the sun is from the Earth to make life possible. Did the sun just haphazzardly land in the right spot considering all of those millions of miles away it is? Not hardly! This whole Universe is a masterpiece of the Master.'s plan. He did it all for us. Enjoy!

      1. Evolution Guy profile image59
        Evolution Guyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Sorry you don't understand Physics.

        Praise Be The Star Goat!

        1. Levertis Steele profile image72
          Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Don't we all lack understanding of many things? Show me someone who knows it all, and I will show you God. Praise be to God! I mean this in sincerety, not to bash.

      2. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Actually, this would be untrue.
        Perfection? Order? Both are subjective.
        Orderly solar system? It's not actually orderly, but appears that way. Again, subjective.
        Unbelievable what gullible people will believe without understanding.
        Conjecture.

        1. Levertis Steele profile image72
          Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          You use insults to attempt to persuade. You have skills, but you are lacking some of the most important ones.

    5. Levertis Steele profile image72
      Levertis Steeleposted 13 years ago

      "Jesus wept" because his friends' faith did not reach beyond the stench and decay of death. He wanted them to know that he came to conquer death. They did not see it. If a baby is hungry and starves to death, he will live forever in the kingdom of God. Jesus suffered and we will, too, before life is over.  He wants us to have faith no matter what. If our minds are of this world, we want only what's in this world, like food and drink. If our minds are spiritual, we want spiritual things, the things that God has prepared for us, spiritual food and living water that will never let us hunger and thirst.

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        More conjecture.

        1. Levertis Steele profile image72
          Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          "More conjecture" is your opinion. You do exactly what you accuse others of doing. I DID compliment you for having skill, Cagsil, but you are lacking! Hey, that rhymed! Do you think that I might be developing poetic skills? LOL!

          1. Cagsil profile image68
            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            That's how you see it. Too bad your perception is skewed(screwed up).
            Really?
            Yes, I'm lacking several areas, but it's not about any knowledge or common sense on this particular topic. There's only so much to learn about this topic and I've covered. But, nice try.
            Not a worthy question.

    6. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image73
      Wesman Todd Shawposted 13 years ago

      why do faceless entities post forum topics on hubpages?

      1. Levertis Steele profile image72
        Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        So many hackers use mugs to do dirty things. Recently, a man used a lady's mug shot to lure another man to his death. Evil abounds. There are many people who use fake mugs, so even the ones you see may not all be real.

      2. Levertis Steele profile image72
        Levertis Steeleposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Why do fake names post forum topics on hubpages? Some names that appear real are fake.

    7. profile image0
      wongomowaleposted 13 years ago

      Because it's all they have.

      1. WD Curry 111 profile image57
        WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        II don't get what you are doing? First let me say that I have trouble with this box. I can;t type well, I am borderline dyslexic. I have to watch my fingers or no telling what key I will hit. I can speed read though.When Sometimes I am typing and the box just wigs out. I wass writing in one while ago and no telling where it went. Help, how can I get through this? Type in other program sometimes, but get my butt kicked pasying. Is this some kind of weird initiation. you guys are talking bak and foth to each other like you have some kind of esoteric knowlege, am I being punked by my cousin again. He loves to skrew ith him. I always smoke his ass in bilble debates. He goes and looks it up yo prove me wrong and them, because he is learning to be humble say,"Oh, I guess your right." He will call me two days later with a comeback to an arguement. Iv'e gone on long enough and somehow the screen is so small. I cants see letters. Hope you get this,

      2. WD Curry 111 profile image57
        WD Curry 111posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        What's your talent. Its hard to tell from here. I'll tell you what. I will check you out tomorrow. i'm an independent. So I don't hate Obama. God said he's cool. Obama said to use big brother's set up to create jobs. He was right. This thing is on autopilot, jack. Let's take it over! We can accomplish a lot. No one has had better opportuniy ever. I would rather slide down a thousand foot razer blade than listen to anymore of this dribble. We got bigger fish to fry. Hey how did you like the Calling all atheists thing. sorry I can't type good I got frustrated.

        *I am world class angler (fisherman) the secret to success is to find  out what they are attracted to, present it properly and set hook at the right time. I got a stringer full. Helllo?! I was role playing to show you how stupid you are being. Doesn't how to make money on the internet say to crate interest and traffic? . If you follow the thread, I caufgt some big ones. Whos that lady that ya'll voted best hubber. How about that! I caught the biggest fish in the pond on the first cast' Everyone kept trying to tell me what hubs is about . . God showed me. There are people accomplishing great things here. I want to be one of them. I am not a hubber and dont want to be.I am an artist, a writer and a musician. I play a mean harp. This is a good gig. I am so glad someone was nice enough to let me set up shop for free. My eighty something mom gave me a little cash. I was going to set up in the flea market. How am I going to tell my mother I bought beans instead.I have more to say. I will be coming around to visit.

    8. profile image51
      Romans814posted 13 years ago

      @Rabgix.  You posed the question; “If God didn't promise you Heaven, or anything at all, would you still be Christians?”

      I responded by saying: 
      There's no 'If Questions'; when it comes to God promise of 'Eternal Life' in Heaven in Christ Jesus. The promises of God are 'yes' and 'amen'. As a Christian, our mind-set is on receiving, and acting on His Will (Word); and not questioning His Truth (Word).

      You replied by saying, “I’ll take your answer as a no.”  Apparently, you didn’t get it, so let me give you the remix:

      The use of ‘IF Questions’; are empty words, with no Truth.  God’s Word is Truth.

      IT IS WRITTEN:   Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient.  (Ephesians 5:6, NKJV)
      Lucifer was the first person to question God's Truth.  And, as a result of his disobedience, prideful action, and rebellious behavior; he was kicked out of Heaven.  Now, he is taking-up his residency on earth; as the god of this world.  And, all those who haven’t accepted Christ Jesus; as their Lord and Savior; are children of disobedience (children of Satan, the Devil).

      IT IS WRITTEN:  You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. ..He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.” (John 8:44, 47, NKJV)

      All Christian have an inner desire to reach lost people and bring them into the Kingdom of God.  There’s two kinds of people, one type is those who seeking to know Truth, and a willingness to know God.  The other type is; those who are seeking darkness.  They avoid God through distractions, and they accept deception from the father of all lies.

      IT IS WRITTEN:  "For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry . . . " (1 Samuel 15:23a, KJV)

      IT IS WRITTEN:  "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:" (Ephesians 2:2, KJV)

      IT IS WRITTEN:  "For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:" (Colossians 3:6, KJV)

      Because, God has created us with a solvent will; we can choose between Life or Death; Light or Darkness; Good or Evil; Truth or Lie; Heaven or Hell.

      IT IS WRITTEN:  For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
      18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”  (John 3:16-21, NKJV)

      Rabgix.  I believe the Word of God mention above; will deal with your two additional questions, concerning Christianity.  Why do Christians use the Bible as evidence in Theological discussion? And When will people realize that Christianity is all lies?
                                                                                                                                                                       God loves you, but He might not care about your mind-set and behavior.  He loves you, because you’re part of His creation.  And, He has allowed me to speak His Truth in Love.

      1. peperuhi profile image60
        peperuhiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Deleted

        1. profile image51
          Romans814posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          The forum question was addressed.  Let me break it down, again.  There's no questioning God's Truth with 'IF THIS', 'IF THAT'.  Satan attempted to deceive Jesus Christ; with 'IF QUESTION'.  'IF QUESTIONS' are from the devil, and his children of disobedience.

          1. THEGOD profile image59
            THEGODposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS STATEMENT. I LIKE IF STATEMENTS. COMMIT THAT TO MEMORY.

      2. wilderness profile image76
        wildernessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Does this mean that anything that IS WRITTEN is absolute truth?  Or that it is truth only if written in your chosen holy scriptures, translated by power mongers and interpreted by you?

        I have a really hard time believing that there is no falsehood or lies even when things ARE WRITTEN on the internet or in the newspaper.  Or in your holy book, for that matter.

    9. profile image51
      Romans814posted 13 years ago

      The god of this world has deceived (blinded) the minds of them which believe not, lest the  light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

    10. profile image51
      Romans814posted 13 years ago

      For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.  (John 3:16, NKJV)

    11. OutsideTheLines profile image60
      OutsideTheLinesposted 13 years ago

      I can understand your point. If someone doesn't believe in God then what good would throwing passages out of a book they don't believe do? There is actual historical evidence to support the life of Jesus. As far as trying to find a logical explanation for Christianity itself...that I cannot answer. It is something you just have to grip on to and believe in faith. It was hard for me and I was agnostic until 3 years ago. But the feeling I felt when I became a Christian and the weeks leading up to it... That's what gives me unmovable faith.

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        If you make this claim, then please point to any location that explains it, outside the lines, per se of any religious book?
        Sure you can...it's called CONTROL!
        It's something that asks people to dismiss common sense for faith. lol
        So, you only felt odd and out of place when you were agnostic and now you feel more comfortable. That's all, because now you are one of the faithful, like 2/3rds the rest of world. Now, you fit in. hmm

        1. OutsideTheLines profile image60
          OutsideTheLinesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          If you would like to merely troll posts or mock people's beliefs that's up to you, but I have been on both sides and it's not about "fitting in". It is about what I have weighed and measured and found to be factual. I can't sway your beliefs and I'm not going to try. That is your choice to believe what you will and this is mine,

          1. Cagsil profile image68
            Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Actually, it's exactly what it is about. The bottom line is how you feel about yourself fitting into the world you live in. So, nice try.
            Then you have failed yourself by not doing enough to weigh, measure and find things that are actually factual. What a shame.
            That's one of your problems. You began thinking like believers that I'm spreading beliefs or opinions. Shame on you.
            I'm sure. Too bad you lack the understanding of your own life, which was precisely what made you run to religion.

            1. OutsideTheLines profile image60
              OutsideTheLinesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

              False. Am I saying Christianity is the only way of life? No. It isn't for everyone. Calling yourself a Christian is easy. Being a TRUE Christian is the difficult part. I'm not sure where you have heard that Christianity is about fitting in, but I assure you it is false. We face ridicule and being branded with false labels every day. It is not the popular thing to do when everyone wants to get hammered on the weekend or smoke down. I don't believe just because someone isn't a Christian that that makes them a bad person. In fact, if you put your common Christian and your common atheist up to a test and had any single person I guarantee that they would say the atheist was more pleasant. This is because most churches preach dogma instead of scripture so you have thousands of people running around playing the blame game with people just because they're different so I can assure you that I am not basing opinions off what other people in churches have told me. I don't judge you for your beliefs so I'm merely asking that you return the same respect.

              1. Cagsil profile image68
                Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                There was nothing false in my statement.
                I'd hope not.
                Now this is the first thing you've said that made sense.
                Yes, people can make any claim they want, all they have to do is open their mouth, regardless of whether or not it's true.
                Actually, it doesn't take much to choose ignorance. People do it all the time.
                I didn't say Christianity. I said religion. Good show on your reading comprehension.
                Everyone does. You would be no different.
                What is your point in this statement. Clarify?
                Actually, the correct word would be gullible.
                Possibly. lol
                You're funny. Dogma was written into the text before it was ever entered into the book you read. Seriously, research it and find out. Jesus' original teachings were nothing to do with religion and had everything to do with living life. Religion STOLE his teachings, so people wouldn't understand that religion and it's god was hoax. Yet, Jesus told his followers that religion preached of a false god, yet religion put his teachings into it, so people wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
                I'm not judging your beliefs. I am judging your actions, which you do everything based on those beliefs. There's a difference, please learn it.

                1. OutsideTheLines profile image60
                  OutsideTheLinesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  How can you say Christians are close minded when you have a completely one track mind when anyone on this thread has even mentioned "God" "Jesus" or "Christian"? I do not know exactly what goal you're trying to attain here. To make Christians denounce their faith? That'll probably happen when you write a hub about how much you love Jesus. (Hint: it won't.) I don't understand why you feel such a need to promote your atheistic agenda, but like I said what you believe is completely your choice and arguing about it over an Internet forum won't make either side more valid. It is useless so on that note I'm throwing in the towel. I hope you have a great weekend and I genuinely wish you a long and happy life.

                  1. Cagsil profile image68
                    Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Did I say Christians are close minded? No. I said they are gullible. There's a difference. Please learn it. And, I don't have a one track mind either. I'm very open minded and understand the knowledge I've accumulated, unlike you.
                    To wake people up. Nothing more, nothing less.
                    I would prefer Christians put two and two together and actually get four, instead of three.
                    Love Jesus? Jesus was a man and extremely insightful. Which is why religious rulers of his time did what they did with his teachings. They recognized it and found it a perfect source for control over the masses. Hence, why Christianity was born.
                    Not arguing anything about Atheism.

    12. bethparker profile image75
      bethparkerposted 13 years ago

      Here's a better question: Why do atheists try to convince Christians that they're wrong? If there is no God, why does it matter to you whether we believe in Him or not?

    13. BobMonger profile image60
      BobMongerposted 13 years ago

      It does get tiresome, doesn't it? Arguing theology with an atheist is a lot like trying to teach a pig to sing-all it does is waste your time and annoy the pig.

    14. WD Curry 111 profile image57
      WD Curry 111posted 13 years ago

      Cagsil,

      Are you still at this? At Devereux, your treatment would be working on your unrealistic self image. You say you are all about helping people. Instead of waylaying and harassing those who see life differently than you, you should be taking that starving baby ome food.

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, I'm going to continue to attack irrationality. If you don't like it, then too bad.
        My self image? I've worked on that a long time ago and continue to work on it everyday of my life. I am unlike anyone you will meet because I recognize things you apparently refuse to even look at.
        Yes I am.
        I am already doing that. Which apparently is something else you refuse to pay close attention to. Good show on you. I help poverty-stricken(which also means helping those who need food). I help homeless people(which also means helping those who need food). What are you doing?

    15. Matt Bunch profile image58
      Matt Bunchposted 13 years ago

      Had to jump in on the starving thing. One of my favorite quotes below.

      " Give a man a fish , and you'll feed him for a day . Give him a religion and he'll starve to death while praying for a fish . " - Timothy Jones.

      1. Cagsil profile image68
        Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        lol lol lol lol lol

      2. Tlherald85 profile image62
        Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Love the quote Matt. Just had to say that. lol.

      3. annlynn9 profile image62
        annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

        Depends on which religion you're talking about. The Christian Bible says, "... if any would not work, neither should he eat." 2 Thessalonians 3:9-11

        1. Tlherald85 profile image62
          Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          How about the people that do work and still cant afford food to feed their children?? What does your precious "holy" book say about that?? A very close friend of mine works 40 hrs a week her husband works 40 hrs a week they have 2 children both make 10 bucks an hour and after paying their bills and ONLY their bills as in electric, gas, water, sewer, trash, and rent they have about 20 bucks a week for food. And they dont qualify for assistance like food stamps because they only have 2 children. So how are they suppose to eat?? Why isn't GOD feeding them??

          1. annlynn9 profile image62
            annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

            My comment was in response to the accusation that persons with religious faith expect God to give them everything while they take no responsibility for their own welfare.  That may be true of some religions, but it is not the faith of the Christian Bible, and the comment had nothing to do with whether or not we help those who are in need.

            However, I don’t know where your friends live, but I have known a couple of families getting food stamps and other assistance with only 1 child in the household.  Also, income limit requirements for food stamps are set by the federal government.

            1. Tlherald85 profile image62
              Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

              Regardless of faith or religion of any kind I believe people need to take care of their own welfare. But that seems to be awfully hard sometimes especially in the economy we are currently living in. If GOD is SO great why doesn't he help these families that do everything they can to walk in faith and light and be good role models for their children?? I do NOT understand how this God everyone speaks of can sit back and watch innocent children starve to death.

              1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Tlherald85  We are the generation of blaming everything what is wrong. Do you wake up in the morning and thanking God for gift of new day? You see that God gave to man all dominion on the earth and we always messed it. He warned us so many time. Do you know that sin release the curse? It is poverty, sickness and death? Just read Deuteronomy 28. Did He told us you shall not murder?  We do not want to execute evildoers, but we murder innocent babies?  We want to have justice, court hearing of murderers, but not give justice and chance to unborn babies? Do you think about it?

                1. Tlherald85 profile image62
                  Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I believe ANY woman that has an abortion should be imprisoned for murder. If it is not okay to murder than it is not okay to meurder PERIOD. Yes I do thank God for a new day everyday and at night I thank God for all the good AND bad things that have happened to me. I believe that EVERYTHING happens for a REASON be it good or bad. Everything that happens to us we LEARN from so the good and the bad are actually inevitably good because you LEARN something. I do not understand your question or statement "Do you know that sin release the curse" I don't know if it is written wrong or I'm just NOT getting it. Can you elaborate on that?? Thanks.

                  1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                    Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    August  No.2011
                    thank You Lord
                    for gift of new day
                    for sunshine
                    or for rain
                    for air I breath
                    for eyes I can see
                    for ear I can listen
                    for leg I can walk
                    for hands I can work
                    for health I can live
                    for water I drink
                    for everything
                    All blessing
                    you're giving me
                    for victory by faith
                    for relation in love
                    I cannot thank You more
                    oh my loving Lord!
                    You are Master giver
                    I thank you Lord
                    You’r giver more
                    I shall not want
                    prayer avail much
                    if we pray
                    with the faith
                    vu©

                  2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                    Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    sorry I never thanks God for bad things. Curses originating from enemy of God's people.  God said: If you will hear and do on my Word you will be blessed. if not  you will be curse. But it is not by God. Hebrew has way to say in permissive mode, we do not have it in English. God is Good and His mercy endures for ever.  It would be Bible conflicting event. There are three main curses: sickness, poverty and death, the blessings are: life (high age, eternal)  health and blessing without lacking anything.
                    I was healed twice with malignant disease, and third time incurable neuropathy.  Glory to God!

                    1. Tlherald85 profile image62
                      Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                      I do not wish to argue. You have your beliefs as I have mine. So we can agree to disagree on some things. However I do not think you as a person good or bad based on religion. You prove to believe what you believe. That is great. I hope it gets you where you want/need to be.

                  3. annlynn9 profile image62
                    annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    Forgive me for interjecting here, but I believe I know what Vladimir means by "sin release the curse". I noticed in one post that he is using a translator from Czech and suspect "release" is just a bad translation. "Unleash" might be better. Genesis 3 and I Corinthians 15 describe how Adam brought sin into the world and sin brought death and all kinds of curses.

                    1. Tlherald85 profile image62
                      Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                      Thank you for the translation.

              2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                in 1932 Mr Tom Bata, Czech who gave many jobs to people said:

                BREAK OF ECONOMIC CRISIS
                I do not believe any break economic crisis by itself. This what we use to say economic crisis has other name of moral troubles. The moral decline is the reason and economic crisis is result. In our country are many people that believe that sanitation of crisis is possible with money.  I am afraid of consequences of this mistake.  In the situation we are in, we do not need any genius kind change or combination. We need moral attitude to people’s work and public values. Do not support failing and bankrupt people. Do not make debt. Do not spend money for  free . Do not rob workers.    Tomas Bata 1932.
                (Translated from Czech: Vladimir Uhri)

                It is our fault not having jobs. We tax companies, we over-regulate to the sky and expecting to have job here.

                1. Tlherald85 profile image62
                  Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  That is very true.

              3. annlynn9 profile image62
                annlynn9posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                The real miracle is that God helps anyone at all. As Vladimir points out, mankind has been in rebellion against God from the beginning. What happens every time a people or a nation prosper? Sooner or later, we say we don't need God. So, then, should He keep on helping? But God does help His people, and sometimes He helps others.

                Do these families you know who "do everything they can to walk in faith and light" but still struggle to survive belong to a Christian church? The churches I know help those in need, both among their membership and in the non-believing communities. My church helped my family twice when we were in financial straits.

                And by the way, until the end of WWII, no one but the Christian churches in the U.S. helped those in need around the world. Along with Bibles and preachers, we sent food, clothing, medicine, and the tools to become self-sufficient. We built orphanages in Africa, India, Korea, and elsewhere. Yet it was not we ourselves who did this but Christ working through us. Without His example and His Holy Spirit to guide us, we would have done nothing.

                1. Tlherald85 profile image62
                  Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  annlynn9 they live in the same town I do and it is VERY TINY. Its actually considered a Village first off. So yes we have many churches. In my lifetime I have attended all of them at one time or another just to see. The next closes town to us is 20 miles away okay. Now with that being said yes they have a church they DID attend regular and have contacted every other church in this town and these are "supposed" Christians at these Churches and they told HIM including his own Church that "apparently it is God's will that you have nothing it is not OUR place as the Church to go against God's will." He has since stopped attending that church and now drives the 20 miles twice a week to attend Church and that Church does help them. I do not judg people. Everyone has a right to their own opinion as do I however regardless of religion I think it extremely WRONG to NOT help someone whom is trying their hardest to help themselves. To me THAT is AGAINST ANY God's will.

                  1. Tlherald85 profile image62
                    Tlherald85posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                    By the way I never said that I did not believe in or accept Christianity. My problems have nothing to do with THAT particular religion or ANY religion itself for that matter.

                    1. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                      Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                      I place here my thanksgiving poem 2x and did not appeared here. I do not know why. It happened 3x. Perhaps I did published it on Face Book.
                      Now it came twice and I cannot erase it.

                2. Vladimir Uhri profile image59
                  Vladimir Uhriposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  After WWII I was small boy. We received help from Americans. The first word I learned in English was supper. It was on the cane word and I eat it. I did not know it is for supper but it was good. I thank all Americans who had the hearts to help.
                  You always have bad apples. But it is not good to observe and focus on dead.

      4. Hollie Thomas profile image60
        Hollie Thomasposted 13 years agoin reply to this

        +1

        1. Edwinoel Tanglao profile image60
          Edwinoel Tanglaoposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          True and responsible Christians work honestly for their family and become role models for their kids.  And they do not have to brag what they have but boast of the truth in the words of God. As Christ stated in Matthew 5:3, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is                                                                 the kingdom of heaven."  In Hebrew 6:7-12, Saint Paul in Christ writes ,"Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for who it is formed receives the blessing of God.  But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed.  In the end it will be burned.

          “Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case – things that accompany salvation.  God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them.  We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure.  We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.”  Christians who follow Jesus see this world as a stepping stone to eternal life, which means true happiness throughout eternity, unlike this worldly life where we are all being tested by God if we deserve to live with him throughout eternity or not, my friends.  You either believe in your mind and find nothingness, as no material thing can make you happy for a long time as it is temporary, as this life has been made temporary by God, so you may have the chance to believe in your heart and spirit, as God is spirit, that your spirit, being one with God, may live through eternity.  True Christians have made their choice, as opposed to those who want to die in their sins, and may never see the light of Christ as they refuse to see the truth in his words..

    16. davenmidtown profile image69
      davenmidtownposted 13 years ago

      amen... though blasphemy is such an awesome word.... egotistical, self righteous, self centered, blind, and basically thankless... are all words and phases I might use instead....of blasphemy.

     
    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)