Garden of Eden was a setup...

[Chad32]

It seems like you want us to just spend enough time trying to convince ourselves of something, until we actually start believing it. Unfortunately that goes for pretty much anything. I'm sure the muslim extremists really believe they'll get seventy two virgins in heaven if they kill themselves for Allah, but that doesn't make it true.

I'm not going to humble myself and ask Yahweh for wisdom. If he wants a relationship, he can come down himself and give some explanations. Personally I don't care to have any sort of relationship with the Abrahamic deity.

[ChristIsLord]

I believe in God and Jesus because the evidence is also undeniable.

False. If such evidence existed, there would be no reason for atheism. Everyone would believe without question.

Consider how C.S. Lewis puts it....I'm paraphrasing here
Jesus was either who He says He was (God in the FLesh) or an absolute nut-job on par with a psycho who claims to be a poached egg. We have two choices here, and that is to dismiss him as complete nut-case or to bow down at his feet as the Lord and Saviour.

Jesus told His disciples that the world hated Him first and that the world (non-believer) would hate them on the count of Him and they would be persecuted even onto death because of His name.

Christians that refuse to renounce Jesus are being slaughtered every day, in our so called modern enlightened era just as Jesus said it would happen.
How do you intend to dismiss that chunk of evidence?

God also tells us that He will reestablish the Jewish nation, which also happened back in about 1948 following WWII. Prophecy fulfilled.

Lets continue beating that dead horse... Jesus was either a complete nut-job on par with the man claiming to be a poached egg when He claimed to be God in the flesh (not just a decent person, or a prophet as some claim) or He was and is who He claims to be. There are no shades of grey here. nut-job or the Son of God... period.

If the evidence was laid out in such a way that anyone who examined it would believe, then that would leave no room for faith.

For instance in John 20:19ish and on we see that Thomas refuses to believe until he see for himself and Jesus not only makes allowance for this questioning of Jesus, but He goes on to say " Because you have seen Me you have believed? Blessed are those that have not seen, and yet believed.

Because of my rational inclinations I continually struggle with what I read in the Bible, much like Thomas, but I keep going back to those verses to remind myself to leave room for faith on those points that just do not compute.

[Thumpalumpacus]

First, lmao at the troll getting trolled, it's always a lovely thing to see.

Secondly, hey, do you have an answer for this yet, "ChristisLord"?

Christ died on the cross after healing a multitude of afflicted; those actions scream of His love for us.

Who created those afflictions in the first place?

"ChristisLord", please answer this question. it's simple, straightforward, and germane to a couple of follow-ups I have for you.

[FatAndFaithless]

Why would you force yourself to have faith? Why can't you simply say "That point doesn't make any sense, so I don't need to follow it or consider it somehow valid."

[Thumpalumpacus]

Lets continue beating that dead horse... Jesus was either a complete nut-job on par with the man claiming to be a poached egg when He claimed to be God in the flesh (not just a decent person, or a prophet as some claim) or He was and is who He claims to be. There are no shades of grey here. nut-job or the Son of God... period.

This is a false dichotomy. It is entirely possible that Jesus (assuming his existence, for the sake of this discussion) knew that what he was saying was nonsense, but was saying it anyway, for earthly reasons, such as financial support, local fame, or other benefits.

[ChristIsLord]

Ok, so you're just a charlatan, a fool, and a liar then. You haven't done any research and you can't cite any research that backs up your claims. You presume to know what's 'too advanced' for people that you don't know on a forum you've never visited, most likely because you don't know the first thing about neuroscience (or science per se) and are unable to provide any citations to back your claims up because you don't understand them yourself.

Thanks for letting us all know you're a loon (as if we needed any further evidence).

Your pride won't allow you to read from an amazing book just because of the words "dummies", "complete idiots". I read these books once upon a time. There is nothing shameful in wanting to learn! It's what makes us human. If I went and started sharing my full knowledge on certain subjects you people would just be lost, you first need to learn yourself about the brain. Atheists in particular do not know a damn thing about the human brain which explains why they don't understand what God really means. You'll never get it because you don't exist. Or do you? Look at this





When I observe people like you I literally do not see anything. Be careful what you wish for and prepare for judgment day.

ALL atheists need to read more about the quantum zeno effect, mindfulness based cognitive behavioral therapy, neurobiology and neuroscience, biochemistry and poetry. Do you really want to fade into non existence permanently?

Are any of you open to the idea of God? Even the SLIGHTEST possibility that there may be a God that does not punish anyone for anything but instead leaves us to our own devices? A God that is known through science and most specifically quantum mechanics?

Most of you here seem to think you know a lot, but in reality I GUARANTEE none of you are scientists. You like to look in the mirror and pretend to be just like me but you can't see because your head's up your ass.

Go learn some fucking science. Idiots.

Or they may consider the preponderance of the evidence, not excluding that which is presented in the four Gospels.

Please educate me on one little thing; I've learned early on in school that the genesis of life was a bunch of gasses floating around near the surface of the earth that were catalyzed into life form (some believe by a discharge of static), or so science would have us believe.
What I would like to know is what scientist under what conditions was able to reproduce that event and where is that research paper that I may read it.

[Tonus]

You'd have to read the Bible cover to cover to even begin to grasp what the Lord is trying to convey in his Love letter to His Creation (mankind). Even then most will not be able to see it for themselves, unless they humble themselves before God and ask for wisdom.

"If you don't agree with me, it's because you didn't read the Bible cover-to-cover. If you did read it cover-to-cover, you didn't humble yourself first. If you did humble yourself first, you didn't pray before you read it. If you did pray before you read it..."

Maybe the lord should've written a book that didn't require so much ceremony to understand properly. Maybe a book written by a truly cosmic intellect would have been far more effective at redeeming mankind. And maybe god should've written this fucking book first and given it to Adam and Eve instead of stranding them with a snake and a tree.

[FatAndFaithless]

Abiogenesis is a cosntantly evolving theory that is working with the current understanding of our reality to create a probabilistic model of how life emerged. Your little "summary" is grossly oversimplified and demonstrates either an utter misunderstanding or an intentional misrepresentation.

As for your question, we can both play that game. Do you have any actual scientific evidence for your God magically creating the universe out of nothing?

[abaris]

Jesus was either a complete nut-job on par with the man claiming to be a poached egg when He claimed to be God in the flesh (not just a decent person, or a prophet as some claim) or He was and is who He claims to be. There are no shades of grey here. nut-job or the Son of God... period.

There are too many shades of gray to count between the two extremes presented. First, if Jesus existed at all. He's not in any way a proven historical figure like others from the same time period. He may have existed, he may be a collection of different person roaming the region at the time. Palestine at that time was full of Messiah figures.

Second, if we assume the existence of a historical Jesus, his words are brought to us by people writing at least 50 years after the fact. Most probably jotting down oral tales they collected. And we all know how such tales have a tendency to grow larger and larger with each person telling them.

Third, with the second extreme of him being the son of god, we're entering supernatural territorry, that can't be proven by any means. And what's more, all the miracles performed by Jesus are based on much older mythology from the region surrounding Palestine. Water into wine, Dyonisos, raising the dead, countless deities, being resurrected, again to many gods to count. The number three, are very old holy number. Goes for the days spent in the grave as well as for the trinity itself.

There are many other possibilities as well. As I said, too many shades of gray to count. I've only pointed out the most obvious ones.

There's absolutely no reason to believe the story unless you willingly submit yourself to it. And then it's called faith.

[Chad32]

---

[quote='ChristIsLord' pid='812830' dateline='1418006931']
I believe in God and Jesus because the evidence is also undeniable.

False. If such evidence existed, there would be no reason for atheism. Everyone would believe without question.

Consider how C.S. Lewis puts it....I'm paraphrasing here
Jesus was either who He says He was (God in the FLesh) or an absolute nut-job on par with a psycho who claims to be a poached egg. We have two choices here, and that is to dismiss him as complete nut-case or to bow down at his feet as the Lord and Saviour.

Jesus told His disciples that the world hated Him first and that the world (non-believer) would hate them on the count of Him and they would be persecuted even onto death because of His name.

Christians that refuse to renounce Jesus are being slaughtered every day, in our so called modern enlightened era just as Jesus said it would happen.
How do you intend to dismiss that chunk of evidence?

God also tells us that He will reestablish the Jewish nation, which also happened back in about 1948 following WWII. Prophecy fulfilled.

Lets continue beating that dead horse... Jesus was either a complete nut-job on par with the man claiming to be a poached egg when He claimed to be God in the flesh (not just a decent person, or a prophet as some claim) or He was and is who He claims to be. There are no shades of grey here. nut-job or the Son of God... period.

If the evidence was laid out in such a way that anyone who examined it would believe, then that would leave no room for faith.

For instance in John 20:19ish and on we see that Thomas refuses to believe until he see for himself and Jesus not only makes allowance for this questioning of Jesus, but He goes on to say " Because you have seen Me you have believed? Blessed are those that have not seen, and yet believed.

Because of my rational inclinations I continually struggle with what I read in the Bible, much like Thomas, but I keep going back to those verses to remind myself to leave room for faith on those points that just do not compute.

---

People fight and kill each other over pretty much any difference. Saying that people who followed christianity could be killed for it means little. Especially since Jesus himself told his it was better to drown people than allow them to convince others that christianity is wrong. When you have such a divisive mindset, you're bound to make enemies.

I believe I've said before that the prophesy of Isreal coming back would be much more impressive if they actually put a date for it. They could have waited 10,000 years, and would be praising Yahweh for a prophesy fullfilled if it happened. it's the kind of thing that's bound to happen eventually if the whole group doesn't get wiped out, so it's not impressive unless they added a specific date.

You act like blind faith is a good thing. It's not. Blessed are those who don't see, and still believe? Only if you have nothing to show. Apparently the second you die, and see god face to face, it's too late. That should raise a red flag, and make you think maybe it's a control tactic used by other humans. Why would god care if you believed in this life or the next? Because the religious leaders can't control you and take your money after you're dead.

Liar, lord, or legend. Like Hercules. Remember how I said that before?

Just keep reading the scriptures over and over until you believe. Just like any other abused person saying over and over that everything that goes wrong is there fault, and they just need to do better so they won't be beaten as often.