(July 1, 2010 at 4:12 pm)The_Flying_Skeptic Wrote: well... there is a verse about stoning homosexuals. isn't there? that would be 'condoning murder', but that's probably not the best example of a contradiction.
There is Leviticus 20:13. Whether or not you believe that this is condoning "murder" I guess would depend on your definition of "murder". If you think it is "murder", though, it seems to me that to be consistent you would also take the position that the US (or at least certain states) also practices in "condoning murder" as they also have the death penalty as a consequence of certain behavior.
Leviticus is a book of the Bible that lists certain laws that the Israelites were to abide by as well as the consequences/punishment for not abiding by them. This is similar to the laws that we all abide by in whatever country in which we live. If we don't follow the rules, the government applies the consequences. For the Israelite society, I would say that God said that homosexuality was against the law and that the consequence of breaking that law was the death penalty. It was the society/government that was to carry out the punishment, just like today.
Consequently, I would not say that this is "condoning murder" just like I do not think that the death penalty in certain states is "condoning murder".
Now before someone starts harping on me like I said it is ok for Christians to go around killing homosexuals, I did not imply any such thing. While I think that homosexuality is wrong because the Bible indicates it is an abomination to God, the Bible also indicates that we are to follow the laws of the land. In this country, there is no law against homosexuality or even if there is, the consequence is not the death penalty. Furthermore, even if there was a law against homosexuality and the consequence was the death penalty, it is not for me personally to judge such things and administer the punishment. That is the government's job. Just like if someone came and killed my family in cold blood, it is not for me to kill that person, it is the government's job to judge and apply consequences.
So, rjh4...you might ask...how do you think you should act towards homosexuals (or any other person that you think does not follow what God says is right in the Bible or treats you wrongly)? Good question!
See Matthew 7:12 and Matthew 5:43-47 for the answer.(July 1, 2010 at 4:12 pm)The_Flying_Skeptic Wrote: I think a better example is how the gospels aren't consistent on what day Jesus was born or died.
I'm not sure what you are talking about here. As far as I know, the Bible says nothing about the day on which Jesus was born. As for the day he died, please provide the contradiction.
(July 1, 2010 at 4:12 pm)The_Flying_Skeptic Wrote: I'm interested because maybe you do have a reason I haven't heard and if you have reasons I have heard then maybe you'll be interested in my opinion about those reasons. If all you have is 'personal evidence' i'm not interested in a story that can be explained by a placebo effect or depression/anxiety induced hallucination or a plastic bag floating around...
Plastic bag floating around????
Please explain as there must be a story to that. As to depression/anxiety induced hallucination, I don't think I have ever had such a hallucination. Regarding a placebo effect, probably all "personal evidence" could be explained as such or something else.Ok...in the interest of honest, open discussion, I will provide a synopsis of the reasons. It is the combination, not each individually, that constitutes the reason.
1. The Bible claims to be the Word of God.
2. Fulfilled prophecy, i.e., the Bible saying things that will happen and they come to be.
3. Historicity of the Bible.
On the last two, I certainly recognize that there are those, such as Min here, that would certainly take issue with these (and I put them here to help answer your question...not to get into a debate on all sorts of specifics). However, there is much written on both sides of the issue and I have found that those writing on the side of prophecy being fulfilled and the Bible being historical to be more compelling.
4. The Bible tells how humans are (sinful) and I know that it is true because I know myself.
5. The Bible tells how those sins can be forgiven and I know this also is true as I have done it and know there is a difference in me.
I doubt this is much help to you but there it is.
(July 1, 2010 at 4:12 pm)The_Flying_Skeptic Wrote: But, it really depends on the context of the supernatural occurrence: if a pastor prays in the name of his deity on an amputee and the leg reappears, whether it's supernatural or natural, the phenomena is evidence that belief in that deity has physical affect.
...or merely evidence that the pastor can pull some good parlor trick. I do not think there is one thing that could ever happen that someone couldn't come up with some naturalistic explanation for. You see, even if it was your leg that reappeared and you knew that God restored it and as a result you became a Christian, you could tell others and they would be skeptical and think you were trying to pull a fast one on them and not be convinced at all. Would their lack of belief in such an instance minimize or render ineffective the reasons for your belief? The answer should be no. Likewise, you say there is no evidence of God even though you say you are open to the possibility, I say everything you see is evidence of God existing and the Bible being the Word of God (just because some things do have a natural explanation doesn't mean that it is not also evidence of God existing).
