What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?

[Astreja]

I have always wondered why atheist are so adamant about spontaneous generation when there is no proof that it is even possible.

Because life originating from simple molecular structures is considerably more plausible than a super-powered sentient being just being out there, for no particular reason --

-- and then resorting to the utterly baffling behaviours described in the Bible.  Seriously, planting two magical trees within reach of two unsophisticated humans with no moral knowledge, and then getting upset at them for failing an obedience test that they were incapable of comprehending until after they had failed it?

No, I'll stick with organic chemistry and wait patiently for science to connect the dots.  I'm in no hurry.

[Minimalist]

Until then, unless you have extraordinary evidence, please don't bother us with your extraordinary claims.

I'd settle for mundane evidence.... or any evidence at all.  All we ever get is rehashed bible bullshit or silliness like this NDE nonsense.  Just once I'd like to see some originality but the best of them, the Bart Ehrmans and such can't come up with anything new.  So what are the odds that this bozo is going to break the mold?

We need to pity ourselves, Astreja.  We are condemned to joust with amateurs.

[Whateverist]

I saw a rabbit get pulled out of a hat once.

Ah, so you believe in God now?

[vulcanlogician]

...Thank you for your honest appraisal. I respect your intellectual views. Some posts I do not answer because they are rude, crude, closed minded and or childish. I know some of the Christians are of the same nature and it bothers me. I know that alien abduction and bigfoot rely on anecdotal evidence, by the same token abiogenesis has no more evidence than intelligent design has. Certainly there is no  proof that life was created by spontaneous generation.

As I said earlier, I'm mightily intrigued as to why you bother to use such odd coloured fonts. Seriously why do you do this?

spontaneous generation

The above is copy pasta from a google of spontaneous generation from the first page of the google search, under Wikipedia's article of the term. It's not from the actual Wiki page--just from the google search result. It has the exact same font/color parameters used in HL's post. So mystery solved.

What is it they say about answering one question and then being confronted with several more?

[Godscreated]

  Paul's letters tell us we can have knowledge. You tell me how I can't know God is real when He has specifically answered prayers in a away that could not be coincidental. 
GC

I'm reading your reply as a direct rebuke of John 3:16.

Sure you want to go there ??

 Why didn't you answer my question, why did you avoid it. My reply in no way rebukes John 3:16, it actually expounds upon it. One must first be saved through faith before one can come to God to find more definite answers.

GC

---

 You couldn't and wouldn't if you could understand. You believe about me as you desire, I've never given you a reason to believe I would lie to anyone about God. They were answered by revelation and the prayers are personal and actually none of your business. 

GC

Knock knock.
Who's there?
Jesus.
Jesus who?
Not telling you.
Thanks a bunch.

 Oh yes, you're funny and do not know who Jesus is, but one day you will meet Him, you should do that before your time runs out.

GC

---

  Paul's letters tell us we can have knowledge. You tell me how I can't know God is real when He has specifically answered prayers in a away that could not be coincidental. 
GC

*my bold*

Well, unless it is an inside job and 'God' turns out to be one more aspect of the psyche right along aside the ego, id and whatnot.  That actually would explain it and other things quite well.

 Believe me when I say I wouldn't expect you to understand. The prayers were within my personal relationship with God and being so makes it none of your business, I do not care you do not believe me, I know the truth and that is what matters.

GC

[vulcanlogician]

You treat atheists as if they've closed their minds off to certain possibilities. This is a mischaracterization. By-and-large, we are a skeptical crowd. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The problem with relying on anecdotal evidence is that it can be used to support untrue claims. It can be a good starting point for investigations, but not a good finishing point. As I pointed out before, claims about alien abduction and bigfoot rely on such evidence.

Don't treat us like we are unwilling to engage in substantiated claims. Don't treat us like we carry around prejudices. You know as well as I do that theists are the ones who typically don't give the other side a fair shake. I, personally, have challenged myself to take a good hard look at many theistic claims, and I still do so to this day. You treat atheists like a group of prejudiced individuals, unwilling to look at the other side, when the truth is, we've taken a good hard look at the other side of the argument and we're tired of it.

It's time for the theistic community to meet us half way. Until then, unless you have extraordinary evidence, please don't bother us with your extraordinary claims.

Thank you for your honest appraisal. I respect your intellectual views. Some posts I do not answer because they are rude, crude, closed minded and or childish. I know some of the Christians are of the same nature and it bothers me. I know that alien abduction and bigfoot rely on anecdotal evidence, by the same token abiogenesis has no more evidence than intelligent design has. Certainly there is no  proof that life was created by spontaneous generation.

Cool that we both appreciate honest and rational conversation. That's a good starting point.

First off, I wouldn't use the term "spontaneous generation." That's an antiquated theory where mice were believed to spontaneously form from haystacks, maggots from rotting meat, etc. It was based on crude observations.

Spontaneous generation refers to an obsolete body of thought on the ordinary formation of living organisms without descent from similar organisms. The theory of spontaneous generation held that living creatures could arise from nonliving matter and that such processes were commonplace and regular.
...
Rejection of spontaneous generation is no longer controversial among biologists. By the middle of the 19th century, the theory of biogenesis had accumulated so much evidential support due to the work of Louis Pasteur and others that the traditional theory of spontaneous generation had been effectively disproven.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation

(My emphasis)

No modern biologist lends any credence to the theory. So stick with the term "abiogenesis" to remain accurate.

You are correct to say that no theory of abiogenesis has been proven. How life arose from nonliving matter is a mystery to modern science. There are competing models at the moment; possibly one of them is correct. Perhaps not. We will see. Science is working on it. Be patient.

Not every truth can be discovered by scientific inquiry, but I don't think this particular mystery will is beholden to philosophic investigation or any other observation-based field besides physical science. Biologists will either figure it out and everybody will know, or they will fail... and how life arose from non-life will forever remain a mystery. My guess is that biologists will figure it out eventually. We'll have to wait and see.

I remember abiogenesis being covered in a high school science class. No one model was advanced as the "correct" one, though some were said to be more plausible than others. Putting plausible models out there as possibilities is part of the work of science. Don't forget that Einstein's relativity was once an untested idea. There were also competing models that tried to explain minor gravitational anomalies, theories which contradicted relativity. They turned out to be wrong. That's science. The important thing is that all claims were tested before being considered valid.

The religious claims surrounding the origins of life cannot stand a modicum of scrutiny before being demonstrated implausible. People have tried, but no one has produced compelling evidence for it. That's just the way it goes. If God really made life during the six day creation period roughly 6,000 years ago, maybe science will discover evidence for it some day. I'm not holding my breath... but hey, if you think that's how it really went down, why don't you think science will discover evidence for it? It seems as if you have already concluded that no evidence will be found that supports creationism. Don't worry. I've concluded the very same thing.

Try not to get butthurt so easily. A ton of fair and rational discussion transpires here, but this isn't a formal debate forum. Some people are going to shoot from the hip and react to your statements emotionally. I've gotten butthurt here before, and I'm an atheist. Might I suggest a metaphorical chastity belt, and maybe some metaphorical lube (in case someone manages to pop the lock). Really, it helps anywhere (whether in RL or the internet) where frank discussions transpire. I came here to have rational discussions and debates but also to say what I honestly feel about religion/religious ideas. Here, I can forcefully express what might be considered rude or disrespectful in RL. This is an appropriate place for such expressions. Get used to it. But keep in mind, also, that you'll find more intellectual honesty here than in any Christian forum I've ever been to.

[Whateverist]

*my bold*

Well, unless it is an inside job and 'God' turns out to be one more aspect of the psyche right along aside the ego, id and whatnot.  That actually would explain it and other things quite well.

 Believe me when I say I wouldn't expect you to understand. The prayers were within my personal relationship with God and being so makes it none of your business, I do not care you do not believe me, I know the truth and that is what matters.

GC

Please believe me when I say I wouldn't expect you to agree with me either. If it were none of my business you should never have posted it on a public forum. That makes it anyone's business who cares to comment on it. You think you know the truth and that makes you pretty much like everyone else, except that some of us are open to the possibility of being wrong sometimes. You seem to be immune from such doubts, but it isn't something I can congratulate you for.

[Amarok]

Believe me when I say I wouldn't expect you to understand. The prayers were within my personal relationship with God and being so makes it none of your business, I do not care you do not believe me, I know the truth and that is what matters.

If you don't care then don't post it here fool .

---

 Oh yes, you're funny and do not know who Jesus is, but one day you will meet Him, you should do that before your time runs out.

Your lame preaching impresses no one

---

Why didn't you answer my question, why did you avoid it. My reply in no way rebukes John 3:16, it actually expounds upon it. One must first be saved through faith before one can come to God to find more definite answers.

 

[Cod]

Knock knock.
Who's there?
Jesus.
Jesus who?
Not telling you.
Thanks a bunch.

 Oh yes, you're funny and do not know who Jesus is, but one day you will meet Him, you should do that before your time runs out.

GC

Hang on... You're the one telling everyone to get to know God, and that you already know him. So when someone asks you direct questions about how you to get to know him, why so evasive? I would have thought that being a Christian involved leading people in the right direction, not bragging about your knowledge but at the same time keeping it to yourself.
I personally think you have no more Knowledge of God than anyone else, but it makes you feel good to think that you do.

[GrandizerII]

I am confident that abiogenesis can not and will not ever be proven because life was created by intelligent design.

I think I see part of the problem with your thinking. You think abiogenesis is the same as spontaneous generation, don't you? Some news for you: it's not. Life isn't some spiritual entity that just spontaneously emerged out of nowhere. It's not even equivalent to consciousness. It's a process that emerged gradually and continues to occur, correlating with process of biological evolution via natural and artificial selection.