Total Posts:80|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Christians, how/why do you believe?

WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.
2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?
3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

I think, I've converted now.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 5:51:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

Well from the first time I talk to you, you never seemed really commited to Christianity. It could be that you've been doubting for some time, and upon coming here, were on the verge of apostacy. But, you weren't interested in engaging in any type of theological discussion, which is odd for someone who claims to be a Christian, and you almost seemed turned off by the idea.

This is a good example of not feeding your spirit, but feeding your flesh. If you remove a cole from the furnace, it eventually burns out.

I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

I would start in Romans, but you can't really go wrong with any book as long as you know how to read it; Christ at the center with a knowledge of Law and Gospel.

To be sure, God does want you to believe it, but the purpose of the bible isn't to convince you or anyone, its to establish the truth; whether the reader likes it or not.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Willful ignorance, more likely. The 2 greatest commandments are to love you neighbor as yourself, and to love God with all your heart, mind, and strength. If one actaully obeyed these as Christ did, then any other possible sin would be avoided by the simple fact that they LOVE as they should.

There would be no fear of consequences, because love will only result in love.

As you know, we don't love like this (if at all really), and even if we avoided a lie, it would be exactly for the reasons you stated: fear of harm, but definately not because we love our neighbor, and not because lying is ungodly.

The problem isn't the logic, its the desires of the heart.

Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

There is no reason you will find in yourself to trust in Christ, or believe in the god of the bible; it is much to counter-inuitive for that. The primary tenants of Christianity are actually very unappealing, and undesireable.

God, God, God.. is pretty much all it's about. When you really examine scripture, it's painfully difficult, and confusing, to try and incorporate man and his will.

This speaks volumes to me, but only because the spirit convicts me. If i didn't have this, I would reject the entire thing, completely..

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.

The miracles of the bible, were for the purpose of the bible.. lol They now help stregnthen those who belong to God, they aren't to try and sway ppl into believing.. neither were they meant for that in the bible.

2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?

Because I believe the bible.. and I believe the God who revealed himself to me.

3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

Yes.
I think, I've converted now.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 5:55:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.
2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?
3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

I think, I've converted now.

If you've never read the Old Testament then you need to do that before reading the New Testament. If not then you're going to miss out on some very fundamental doctrine, and will not have a good foundation for understanding the NT. I'd suggest reading it for yourself, writing down questions as you go, then begin speaking to others about it. It's easy for a person's particular bias to affect what you believe the Bible is telling you before you even read it, which is why I suggest reading it first before getting others' input.
WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 6:35:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:51:24 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

Well from the first time I talk to you, you never seemed really commited to Christianity. It could be that you've been doubting for some time, and upon coming here, were on the verge of apostacy. But, you weren't interested in engaging in any type of theological discussion, which is odd for someone who claims to be a Christian, and you almost seemed turned off by the idea.

I had to google apostasy lol, but yes. It has been (not to mention the time it took for me to start doubting) about half a year of me going back and forth but now that's it, I am not a Christian anymore. It is a shame because I would like to be. God is certainly a cool concept and it would be nice to know that some omnipotent being is there. Also I like the Christian community. However, what has been said has been said and I'm not a Christian.

As for theological discussions, I've done them to death. I've discussed every argument, I've seen quite a few WLC's debates plus the ones on this site, I also read some Christian book, read the bible, re-read the bible, watched movies/documentaries about the bible, pondered the teachings, listened to different preachers and on and on and on.


This is a good example of not feeding your spirit, but feeding your flesh. If you remove a cole from the furnace, it eventually burns out.

I'm burning my furnace via non-biblical, Buddhist and humanist sources to expand my horizon. I succeeded in that regard. For example, I found the amazingly effective meditation technique.


I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

I would start in Romans, but you can't really go wrong with any book as long as you know how to read it; Christ at the center with a knowledge of Law and Gospel.

To be sure, God does want you to believe it, but the purpose of the bible isn't to convince you or anyone, its to establish the truth; whether the reader likes it or not.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Willful ignorance, more likely. The 2 greatest commandments are to love you neighbor as yourself, and to love God with all your heart, mind, and strength. If one actaully obeyed these as Christ did, then any other possible sin would be avoided by the simple fact that they LOVE as they should.

Okay, say a person is willfully ignorant of God and his commands. Why? Well, he has to be non-willfully ignorant of other things (like the destination of his path) or he is absolutely insane.


There would be no fear of consequences, because love will only result in love.

As you know, we don't love like this (if at all really), and even if we avoided a lie, it would be exactly for the reasons you stated: fear of harm, but definately not because we love our neighbor, and not because lying is ungodly.

The problem isn't the logic, its the desires of the heart.

The heart is ruled by logic (or for some types of love, by biology). Otherwise it would spontaneous, inconstant and illogical.


Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

There is no reason you will find in yourself to trust in Christ, or believe in the god of the bible; it is much to counter-inuitive for that. The primary tenants of Christianity are actually very unappealing, and undesireable.

God, God, God.. is pretty much all it's about. When you really examine scripture, it's painfully difficult, and confusing, to try and incorporate man and his will.

This speaks volumes to me, but only because the spirit convicts me. If i didn't have this, I would reject the entire thing, completely..

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.

The miracles of the bible, were for the purpose of the bible.. lol They now help stregnthen those who belong to God, they aren't to try and sway ppl into believing.. neither were they meant for that in the bible.

2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?

Because I believe the bible.. and I believe the God who revealed himself to me.

3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

Yes.

Alas, I agree.

I think, I've converted now.
WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 6:36:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:55:18 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.
2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?
3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

I think, I've converted now.

If you've never read the Old Testament then you need to do that before reading the New Testament. If not then you're going to miss out on some very fundamental doctrine, and will not have a good foundation for understanding the NT. I'd suggest reading it for yourself, writing down questions as you go, then begin speaking to others about it. It's easy for a person's particular bias to affect what you believe the Bible is telling you before you even read it, which is why I suggest reading it first before getting others' input.

I have read some of it and I remember finding it even less believable. I wonder how unbelievable I would find it now.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 7:35:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 6:35:07 PM, WW wrote:
. God is certainly a cool concept and it would be nice to know that some omnipotent being is there. Also I like the Christian community. However, what has been said has been said and I'm not a Christian.

Oh, so you're straight to atheist? I thought maybe you'd make a pit stop in agnosticism for a while..lol

I wont deny, being loved by an almighty God is awesome. However, I think most Christians are only into the concept.. they'd rather use the powerful words of scripture, and mold them to whats more appealing to them. If something contradicts what they think is right, they'll "interpret" it differently.

Usually using intuition to determine what the word says, versus letting the word be it's own canon.

To get to the point, I don't find Christianity all that appealing. I would actively oppose such a teaching if God had not regenerated me (I should just say pulled the carpet from under me). I believe the true teachings of Christ, and of the apostles, is inhuman.

Nothing in me enjoys or agrees with the essential truths about Christianity.

As for theological discussions, I've done them to death. I've discussed every argument, I've seen quite a few WLC's debates plus the ones on this site, I also read some Christian book, read the bible, re-read the bible, watched movies/documentaries about the bible, pondered the teachings, listened to different preachers and on and on and on.

Of course. But, it still seems odd that you aren't even willing to discuss it..

Reinforced by my time here on DDO, I believe Reformed Theology makes the most sense; despite being incredibly counter-intuitive. That even if you don't believe it, when explained by the right person, it would be the theology that makes the most sense.

As a salesman, I can be a bit pushy, but I genuinely would like to discuss it with you.

This is a good example of not feeding your spirit, but feeding your flesh. If you remove a cole from the furnace, it eventually burns out.

I'm burning my furnace via non-biblical, Buddhist and humanist sources to expand my horizon. I succeeded in that regard. For example, I found the amazingly effective meditation technique.

I understand, and I'm sure it brings you a ton of clarity, or peace, or what have you. I don't doubt the benefits of what you are doing.

As I was saying above, there is really nothing of that sort for the Christian.. If a person is seeking for such a thing in Christianity, they will be left empty handed.

From what I've discovered, the search inwardly (towards mankind or self) is probably the least productive, yet the most enjoyable..This is why I live so sinfully; I love it. My coal is always burning low.. lol

Okay, say a person is willfully ignorant of God and his commands. Why? Well, he has to be non-willfully ignorant of other things (like the destination of his path) or he is absolutely insane.

I've explained in a bit of detail above why we are willfully ignorant, but in case that isn't enough, the scriptures would tell us that it's contrary to our nature. We do not like righteousness, and we do not like good. The only reason why anyone likes or does "forms" of good, is because of God's presence; whether they acknowledge him or not.

So, since any good decisions we appear to make are because of Gods influence, then nothing in our nature is about God, or likes God.

Not quite sure I understood your second sentence.

The problem isn't the logic, its the desires of the heart.

The heart is ruled by logic (or for some types of love, by biology). Otherwise it would spontaneous, inconstant and illogical.

Hmm, not sure why you are saying this? I wasn't saying that the heart isn't logical, or that there is some problem with logic. I was simply saying that there wasn't anything wrong with the logic in why people sin even though they know there is something wrong with it.

We are very logical creatures, but the logic is like science, it's a tool.. logic is a tool of the brain. The only problem, is that we could have a broken tool; isn't a broken hammer, still a hammer? (Sorry to get all philosophical, but I'm a little high and the words are just kinda flowing out of me..lol )

3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

Yes.

Alas, I agree.

So, what does that tell you about me?
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:01:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
So my question to Christians:

The next genuine believer to step forward outside of their preferred Story book Land will be the very first in man's entire History!

This is easily proven using their very own preferred bible Story book!

At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.

Well actually the Magician ' DYNAMO ' was shown on the tele' a few weeks ago ' walking on water ' so miracles like jebus was claimed to have done still do happen (apparently? LOL!)

At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?

Because their ' Faith ' is the greater one, but alas their legitimate evidence remains a constant zero!

At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

More than possible!

Factual!

Fortunately Religions & Cults like catholicism are already in rapid decline and according to recent Data, ALL religions & Cults will be finally rejected by ALL white-skinned Nations within a few decades -

" Within a few decades, Christianity will be overwhelmingly a non-European, non-white religion." (Source: http://www.oxfordscholarship.com...)

At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I think, I've converted now.

Good to see rationality finally taking the grasp!

Cheers!
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:05:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 8:01:41 PM, Composer wrote:
ALL religions & Cults will be finally rejected by ALL white-skinned Nations within a few decades -

Developed nations? Nah.
First-world nations? Nah.
Western nations? Nah.
Industrialized nations? Nah.
Civilized nations? Nah.

White-skinned nations? Yes.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:11:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

What kind of benefits do you mean?

I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Sin isn't a passive thing, it's whenever you go contrary to your conscious. That book you're reading makes it clear that God will judge according to what a person knows, not to what he doesn't know.

Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

If what Christ taught and practiced was vindicated by God somehow, then we would know it. Turns out the historical data for his resurrection remains quite compelling. And so if Christ truly rose from the dead, then everything he said would be vindicated by God. And thus Christian particularism would stand.

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.

What need is there for more miracles when God chose to act at one (very crucial) point in history already? It indicates within that book you're reading that God isn't interested in getting us to believe he exists, but rather cultivating the self, and in turn, our relationship with him. What need would God have to walk on water just to do tricks for us now?

Miracles remain possible and even reasonable to believe in. I've yet to debate this with anyone if you're interested.

2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?

Christian particularism, because of what Christ claimed and did, then how the miraculous resurrection vindicated that over other religions.

3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

Only if Christ wasn't resurrected and if what his followers proudly died for was some tragic hoax... unlikely conspiracy though.

I think, I've converted now.

To what?
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:13:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 8:01:41 PM, Composer wrote:
ALL religions & Cults will be finally rejected by ALL white-skinned Nations within a few decades -

This has been a promise by atheists since a thousand years ago.
WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:17:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 8:05:07 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/2/2013 8:01:41 PM, Composer wrote:
ALL religions & Cults will be finally rejected by ALL white-skinned Nations within a few decades -

Developed nations? Nah.
First-world nations? Nah.
Western nations? Nah.
Industrialized nations? Nah.
Civilized nations? Nah.

White-skinned nations? Yes.

lol :D
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:39:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Because everything else only offers depedence, hoplessness and tyranny.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:46:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
@Paradox_7

"Oh, so you're straight to atheist? I thought maybe you'd make a pit stop in agnosticism for a while..lol"

I am agnostic in that I don't know if God exits. Since I don't know, I assume he doesn't.

"We do not like righteousness, and we do not like good."

That's because we do not recognize good as good. We aren't willfully ignorant of good and if we are then we are not willfully ignorant that ignoring the good is not good for us.

Let's say it differently:
1. We can only choose the option that we think is best for us.
2. We choose what we think is best for us.

"I was simply saying that there wasn't anything wrong with the logic in why people sin even though they know there is something wrong with it."

You must reject my first premise then ("1. We can only choose the option that we think is best for us"). If you do and you're right, then we are all insane, we perform random actions and believe random stuff for no reason.

"So, what does that tell you about me?"

That you're honest.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:47:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.
2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?
3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

I think, I've converted now.

If your only motivation for being a Christian are the benefits, you're going to be sorely disappointed, indeed. Christianity is not a selfish religion; it's a religion of selfless humility. You need to put others before yourself. You need to be willing to admit that you're a sinner and that you can't save yourself. Jesus Himself even said "the sun shines on the righteous and the unrighteous, and the rain falls on the righteous and the unrighteous." The benefits of being a Christian is that we can be saved from sin and our ultimate destination in Hell. We have hope for the future after death, believing that we won't just rot in the grave but that we have an eternity to live in paradise.

You need to be saved from your sins because no one is perfect. Even Christians know what happens to unrepentant sinners, but we still sin. You can know that liars go to Hell, but that doesn't mean that, being a "sane" person, you'll never tell a lie. Sin is not just the result of ignorance, it's also the result of an evil (sinful) nature. Some people know that they're sinning and they don't care. Romans tells us that the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.

We can believe in this specific God specifically because of the teachings of Jesus. Jesus was a literal person who existed in space/time, and his resurrection is a historically verifiable event. He predicted his own resurrection and followed through with it. The only way he could have done so is if the Christian God exists.

To answer your questions:

1) How do you define miracle? I think there are miracles going on all around us. The fact that we're still alive, not having died much younger is a miracle, considering how many people die prematurely. The very fact that the universe was fine-tuned for human life is a miracle that we can see now.

2) I deny the other faiths because I have tested the Christian faith and found it true. Contradictory religions cannot both (or all) be true. In order to test the Christian faith, you don't have to disprove all other faiths. You merely have to test what the Christian faith teaches and see if it's correct. That being said, there are problems in the claims of other religions that don't pan out to reality.

3) Sure, it's possible. Is it true? I believe there is very, very strong evidence to suggest that the God of Christianity is the true God.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 8:50:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Not necessarily. Just because you logically know that something will hurt you in the long run, doesn't mean you won't do it anyway. People choose instant gratification over delayed gratification all the time. Case in point: unprotected fornication.


Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

The belief in a specific God is a cumulative argument, me thinks.


So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.

I think there are modern miracles. For example, the Miracle of Lanciano, the Shroud of Turin, Juan Diego's Tilma, and the dancing of the sun at Fatima.

2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?

I don't find them credible. For one thing, the Bible is the best-selling history book of all time, and it supports Christianity. Other theistic religions like Judaism and Islam claim to believe in the Bible, but the Bible clearly contradicts these religions. For example, Judaism and Islam think Jesus was a prophet of God; however, Jesus made it pretty clear that he was God himself. This would make Jesus a liar, and by extension, not a prophet of God, as those other religions claim.

3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

No, because of the reasons I just listed above.


I think, I've converted now.

Awesome.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:05:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
GarretKadeDupre wrote:

I don't find them credible. For one thing, the Bible is the best-selling history book of all time, and it supports Christianity. Other theistic religions like Judaism and Islam claim to believe in the Bible, but the Bible clearly contradicts these religions. For example, Judaism and Islam think Jesus was a prophet of God; however, Jesus made it pretty clear that he was God himself. This would make Jesus a liar, and by extension, not a prophet of God, as those other religions claim.

The Bible is, frankly, provably not a history book. There are too many obvious factual inaccuracies in it, and it is not in keeping with other historical accounts of the time. After all, if the dead rose from the grave and "appeared to many", don't you think there'd be more supporting documentation?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:05:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 8:11:53 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

What kind of benefits do you mean?

Peacefulness, happiness, etc.


I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Sin isn't a passive thing, it's whenever you go contrary to your conscious. That book you're reading makes it clear that God will judge according to what a person knows, not to what he doesn't know.

If I know what is right (love and stuff) and I know why I should do what is right (heaven, commandments, happiness, etc.) and I know how to do what is right (prayer and other stuff) and I am not completely insane (I don't randomly decide to do what is not in my best interest), it is impossible for me to sin. If one of these characteristics is missing or lacking, then I shouldn't be judged by God as I don't know any better.


Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

If what Christ taught and practiced was vindicated by God somehow, then we would know it. Turns out the historical data for his resurrection remains quite compelling. And so if Christ truly rose from the dead, then everything he said would be vindicated by God. And thus Christian particularism would stand.

A lot of religions would say the same.


So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.

What need is there for more miracles when God chose to act at one (very crucial) point in history already? It indicates within that book you're reading that God isn't interested in getting us to believe he exists, but rather cultivating the self, and in turn, our relationship with him. What need would God have to walk on water just to do tricks for us now?

It was 2000 years ago with the only record being books, not video or pictures but old books. If he isn't interested in me believing in his existence, then okay. I am not interested in his existence either.


Miracles remain possible and even reasonable to believe in. I've yet to debate this with anyone if you're interested.

2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?

Christian particularism, because of what Christ claimed and did, then how the miraculous resurrection vindicated that over other religions.

3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

Only if Christ wasn't resurrected and if what his followers proudly died for was some tragic hoax... unlikely conspiracy though.

I like that argument. It is weak though. People have died for a hoax before.


I think, I've converted now.

To what?

Agnosticism
WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:19:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
@KeytarHero
"The benefits of being a Christian is that we can be saved from sin and our ultimate destination in Hell. We have hope for the future after death, believing that we won't just rot in the grave but that we have an eternity to live in paradise."

1: I see no need to be saved from sin as I explained to Paradox.
2: Many religions believe in an eternal paradise.
3: Life after death does not excite me as a I subscribe to the Buddhist's idea of no-self.

"Sin is not just the result of ignorance, it's also the result of an evil (sinful) nature. Some people know that they're sinning and they don't care. Romans tells us that the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord."

Who with a sane mind would sin and believe that "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord"? No one.

People choose what is logical, always and without a choice. If sin appears logical, then the person will be a sinner. If love appears logical, the person will be loving.

"The very fact that the universe was fine-tuned for human life is a miracle that we can see now."

No, that is not a miracle as we don't need God for this to happen. Also, our planet may be habitable (even here there is a lot of waste) but most aren't. That's not fine tuning, that's chance.

"Sure, it's possible."

I'm not saying that it's just possible but that it is quite possible, we can very, very easily imagine it being false. There's nothing very unique about Christianity.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:25:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 9:05:00 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
GarretKadeDupre wrote:

I don't find them credible. For one thing, the Bible is the best-selling history book of all time, and it supports Christianity. Other theistic religions like Judaism and Islam claim to believe in the Bible, but the Bible clearly contradicts these religions. For example, Judaism and Islam think Jesus was a prophet of God; however, Jesus made it pretty clear that he was God himself. This would make Jesus a liar, and by extension, not a prophet of God, as those other religions claim.

The Bible is, frankly, provably not a history book. There are too many obvious factual inaccuracies in it, and it is not in keeping with other historical accounts of the time. After all, if the dead rose from the grave and "appeared to many", don't you think there'd be more supporting documentation?

bladerunner060! You seem to have distanced yourself from me. I guess my poor conduct earned it, though. I've gotten cocky recently and I'm trying to resume my 'gentlemanly' and 'scholarly' behavior again :)

I disagree that the Bible isn't a history book. All you've done is show how it's an inaccurate and perhaps biased one.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:26:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
@GarretKadeDupre

"Just because you logically know that something will hurt you in the long run, doesn't mean you won't do it anyway."

I never said that we can't be illogical. What I did say is that we always will do what we think is logical (with the exception of insane people, etc.)

"I think there are modern miracles. For example, the Miracle of Lanciano, the Shroud of Turin, Juan Diego's Tilma, and the dancing of the sun at Fatima."

They are not convincing, especially when compared to the miracles performed by Jesus.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:35:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 9:05:42 PM, WW wrote:
At 2/2/2013 8:11:53 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

What kind of benefits do you mean?

Peacefulness, happiness, etc.


I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Sin isn't a passive thing, it's whenever you go contrary to your conscious. That book you're reading makes it clear that God will judge according to what a person knows, not to what he doesn't know.

If I know what is right (love and stuff) and I know why I should do what is right (heaven, commandments, happiness, etc.) and I know how to do what is right (prayer and other stuff) and I am not completely insane (I don't randomly decide to do what is not in my best interest), it is impossible for me to sin. If one of these characteristics is missing or lacking, then I shouldn't be judged by God as I don't know any better.

Exactly.

Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

If what Christ taught and practiced was vindicated by God somehow, then we would know it. Turns out the historical data for his resurrection remains quite compelling. And so if Christ truly rose from the dead, then everything he said would be vindicated by God. And thus Christian particularism would stand.

A lot of religions would say the same.

Not really, Christianity is rooted in historical falsifiable events in the past. If say the true bones of Christ were found, Christianity would be false, and all the claims of Christ would be utterances of a mad man claiming with empty words to be the only way.

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.

What need is there for more miracles when God chose to act at one (very crucial) point in history already? It indicates within that book you're reading that God isn't interested in getting us to believe he exists, but rather cultivating the self, and in turn, our relationship with him. What need would God have to walk on water just to do tricks for us now?

It was 2000 years ago with the only record being books, not video or pictures but old books. If he isn't interested in me believing in his existence, then okay. I am not interested in his existence either.

You mean videos and pictures vulnerable to the same sort of tampering that books are? I don't see your point here friend. Are you opting for a conspiracy theory? Theories which are widely rejected among historical scholars today?

Second, it seems to me you're at least interested enough in his existence to post on a debate forum your worries regarding the truth of Christianity. Isn't it true that If God were personal and rational that he would endow his creation of persons with properly functioning reasoning faculties, and the ability to seek him with an open heart and mind?

What of this on naturalistic evolution? Wouldn't it be true that if naturalism were true then such faculties would only be properly functioning towards survival value and not truth value? If this is the case then the mere showmanship of your ability to reason if God is true or not shows that that ability requires design, and therefore a designer. You're well on your way already!
-)

Miracles remain possible and even reasonable to believe in. I've yet to debate this with anyone if you're interested.

2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?

Christian particularism, because of what Christ claimed and did, then how the miraculous resurrection vindicated that over other religions.

3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

Only if Christ wasn't resurrected and if what his followers proudly died for was some tragic hoax... unlikely conspiracy though.

I like that argument. It is weak though. People have died for a hoax before.

To the extent that the early Christian church did? ... Again, are you proposing the alternative theory of conspiracy to explain the origin of the early Christian church against every predisposition to the contrary? ... You know that in early Jerusalem if your 'messiah' died you either found yourself a new one, or stopped looking. These folks didn't do that, they burned alive proclaiming specifically Christ's vitality, not just his good philosophy on life. Doesn't sound weak to me.

I think, I've converted now.

To what?

Agnosticism

That's reasonable given your current view. Many folks make the jump right to atheism and I don't know why- I blame mTV, FoX, and tuesdays.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:40:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 9:27:33 PM, WW wrote:
Ah well, it seems that I'll stay an agnostic. ****!

If you're relying on DDO for your re-conversion, I'd say you're belief structure is as wishy washy as a sand pebble on a beach!

A personal relationship with God is just that, personal and immediate. We rarely come to knowledge by acquaintance of God by a knowledge by description first. If that were how humans relate then I'd feel sorry for the human populace after about 3 years. We'd be a dying breed yo!

Nah, knowledge by description at best gets you to a triviality of reality, not an experience of it. It would be like going on a date with a Miami Dolphin cheerleader (which I've done), and staring at the menu the whole time without getting to know her.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:40:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 9:25:27 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I disagree that the Bible isn't a history book. All you've done is show how it's an inaccurate and perhaps biased one.

Fair enough. But by that token, the Eddas are history books, too.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:42:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 9:40:58 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 2/2/2013 9:25:27 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I disagree that the Bible isn't a history book. All you've done is show how it's an inaccurate and perhaps biased one.

Fair enough. But by that token, the Eddas are history books, too.

blade, the one catholic historical scholar of the bible here. All other historians who do biblical criticism for their livelihoods can suck it, they're studying fiction only... right.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 9:58:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 9:40:58 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 2/2/2013 9:25:27 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I disagree that the Bible isn't a history book. All you've done is show how it's an inaccurate and perhaps biased one.

Fair enough. But by that token, the Eddas are history books, too.

But they aren't the best-selling history books ;)
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 10:36:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 8:39:51 PM, sadolite wrote:
Because everything else only offers depedence, hoplessness and tyranny.

With all due respect, if that's really what you think then I highly doubt you have scarcely more than a shallow understanding of most other religions and/or philosophies.
Rusty
Posts: 2,109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 10:46:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 9:58:33 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 2/2/2013 9:40:58 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 2/2/2013 9:25:27 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I disagree that the Bible isn't a history book. All you've done is show how it's an inaccurate and perhaps biased one.

Fair enough. But by that token, the Eddas are history books, too.

But they aren't the best-selling history books ;)

Ugh, there are so many unique factors that this often-quoted factoid seems kind of misleading. For one, the Bible has been around a lot longer than, say, the Lord of the Rings or a Tale of Two Cities. Two, what about versions? Are we including those little hotel Bibles that only contain the New Testament? What about the Queen James Bible and other editions that a conservative evangelical would never be seen with? Three, isn't it fair to say that they're often mass-purchased (church pews, mission trips, etc.), whereas books on the New York Times bestsellers list are often bought more on a personal level? In fact, couldn't someone make an argument that the ratio of people who read the Bible to number of Bibles purchases is actually lower than the ratio of people who have read Harry Potter or the 2012 NY Times Bestseller compared to number of copies purchased?
Rusty
Posts: 2,109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/2/2013 10:48:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Oops, I just saw that you said history. I hear "The Bible is the best-selling book of all time!" a lot and the accompanying tone always kind of bugs me for those reasons.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 2:36:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/2/2013 5:28:03 PM, WW wrote:
I decided to start reading the bible, chapter by chapter, because I am unsure of my Christian faith. Matter of fact, my first post was about the seemingly lack of benefits in being Christian as opposed to Muslim or Buddhist and so on.

I started with the gospel of Matthew, the first chapter. So, basically, the book wants me to believe in a virgin birth, an angel that, for once in human history, intervenes and the need to be saved from sin.

Firstly, why should I be saved from sin. Is sin not a result of ignorance? If a sane person knew that, for example, lying will hurt them in the long run, wouldn't the person not sin as he is capable of logic?

Second, why should I believe any of it? William Lane Craig and Thomas Aquinas may be right about God, but why believe in this specific God?

So my question to Christians:
1: How do you reconcile the many miracles present in the Bible and none being present right now? Like, Jesus walking on water and now: nothing.
2: Or why do you deny the other faiths which also claim to have miraculous prophets/ Gods?
3: Is it not quite possible (to a vexing degree) that Christianity is another false faith in a pool of useless ideologues?

I think, I've converted now.

I find it completely bogus, thats why I don't believe. Although some of the bible is interseting. But thats it.