Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why aren't those things evidence for any of the other 'creator gods' that exist or have been said to have existed in other religions?
They could be. I'm only promoting ID.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
First off. Strobel was not an atheist and if you bother to take the time and effort to read his biased book...'The Case for Christ' he admits that he isn't and never was an atheist. He was raise as a believer by Christian parents.
I did read that book.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
Yet it is not atheists who believe that but theists! You, as a theist, believe that your god came from 'nothing'; produced the universe from 'nothing'; produced Earth from 'nothing'; produced plants and animals from 'nothing' and then made humans from 'nothing'. Something from nothing is not our beliefs but YOURS!
The creator (of anything) is always greater than the created. Therefore, it is plausible that the creator has always existed.
See the underlined portion? That qualifier changes the tone of the question. I chose to answer the question using Jesus' plan and intent for the Holy Spirit. I don't need to clarify. Either one of you can read it and agree/disagree with what Jesus stated.
If you choose not to address what Jesus stated - that's fine... no worries from me.
And again you evade and obfuscate. I already pointed out that the chapters you cited tell how the Spirit will operate, but they say NOTHING about the characteristics of the Spirit by which you may know that even an identical WAY of operation is actually the Spirit and not some other spirit.
So, once again, do the chapters you cited in any way contradict the scriptures Mystic cited concerning the identifiable characteristics of the Spirir by which you can know that it is actually the Spirit. If your understanding of those chapters is different from what I have stated, please enlighten me. If it is not, then please answer Mystic's follow up question.
I am prepared to dance with you on this subject until either a resolution or your usual retreat.
And again you evade and obfuscate. I already pointed out that the chapters you cited tell how the Spirit will operate, but they say NOTHING about the characteristics of the Spirit by which you may know that even an identical WAY of operation is actually the Spirit and not some other spirit.
So, once again, do the chapters you cited in any way contradict the scriptures Mystic cited concerning the identifiable characteristics of the Spirir by which you can know that it is actually the Spirit. If your understanding of those chapters is different from what I have stated, please enlighten me. If it is not, then please answer Mystic's follow up question.
I am prepared to dance with you on this subject until either a resolution or your usual retreat.
Great... since you are mentally prepared, I will just back away.
Scripture is sufficient to answer your inquiry, or Mystic's inquiry - whether it is John 14-16, 1 Corinthians 13, or Galatians 5. Seek wisdom with a proper heart and the leading of the Holy Spirit, and He will answer. I am insufficient for the task.
Great... since you are mentally prepared, I will just back away.
Scripture is sufficient to answer your inquiry, or Mystic's inquiry - whether it is John 14-16, 1 Corinthians 13, or Galatians 5. Seek wisdom with a proper heart and the leading of the Holy Spirit, and He will answer. I am insufficient for the task.
Thought so. Scripture may be sufficient, but clearly YOU are not simply because ALL you really have to go on is the doctrines you have been taught.
I already provided evidence outside of the Bible that they existed. And that at least some of the apostles were martyred is also attested to outside of the Bible.
No you haven't. You supplied statements and beliefs from church fathers who were schooled in the Bible. They got their beliefs from the Bible. They were not around at the time in question.
Quote:
But you can do your own research on that, although I am fairly certain that you won't.
Well you will be certainly wrong because world religions have been an interest of mine for over 40 years...and I could confidently claim that I have studied your Bible more than you.
Quote:
First of all, the fact that Jesus existed historically,...
That JtC existed histoically is not a fact it is a belief. Whether or not the other Jesus existed is not important.because he is not the divine son of a god that you want to have existed.
Quote:
...and that he was crucified during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberius when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea is recognized by almost every scholar of antiquity as stated by Bart Ehrman.
Whether or not an itinerant rebel rabbi was executed is irrelevant. What you need to produce is evidence that if such a person was the divine son of a god.
Quote:
As for Jesus being resurrected, again the historical evidence consists of the fact that not only did the apostles believe they saw the risen Jesus, but so did Paul who was not a believer at the time the risen Jesus appeared to him.
The only evidence you have for this is the Bible or other religious works. Unless they are discounted I'm going to ask you to show some intellectual honesty and concede that all stories in the religious books of other religions where their gods have appeared to sundry people is evidence that the reports are true.
Quote:
And since the naturalistic explanations for why they believed they saw the risen Jesus can be ruled out, that leaves the only other explanation which is that the risen Jesus really did appear to them.
No. It means that they BELIEVED he did....which is no different to millions of Japanese people believing that their emperor was a god.
Quote:
Yes the historical evidence for Jesus' resurrection can be examined because the historical evidence does exist and has been examined by scholars for many years. To simply deny that fact as you are doing is simply parading your ignorance of the subject
There is no historical evidence. Nada, zilch, nunca. There is not a single scrap of verifiable evidence for the existence of JtC. Any other Jesus that may or may not have existed is simply irrelevant. The important person here is the one known as Jesus The Christ, divine son of a god, worker of miracles.
Quote:
And yet, even many skeptical scholars who have studied the resurrection have concluded that the naturalistic theories do not adequately explain why the disciples believe they saw the risen Jesus. But since those same skeptical scholars can't bring themselves to believe that Jesus was actually risen, they are left with a ???
Who are they. Provide a list of these 'sceptical scholars.'
Quote:
Being a believer, as Habermas is, doesn't disqualify a person from being able to provide accurate historical information.
The problem you are going to have with him is that he is a Bible apologist and has dedicated his career to proving the Bible is true. His MO (and I have seen it first hand) is to assume that what the Bible says is true and then force-fit the 'evidence' to what the Bible says. That is how apologists work.
Quote:
Okay, look. It's your choice whether you want to simply dismiss all of this because you simply don't want to believe it, or whether you will make an effort to objectively look at the historical evidence. I already provided a link to Habermas' website which contains articles pertaining to resurrection studies.
I've had experience with Habermas thanks. He even thinks Strobel is a star. That should tell you a lot about him. Take this which he refers to as '12 Historical Facts' to prove JtC existed.
1. Jesus died by crucifixion.
2. He was buried.
3. His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.
4. The tomb was empty (the most contested).
5. The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus (the most important proof).
6. The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.
7. The resurrection was the central message.
8. They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem.
9. The Church was born and grew.
10. Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship.
11. James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus (James was a family skeptic).
12. Paul was converted to the faith (Paul was an outsider skeptic).
Well no Mr Habermas, they are not 'facts' at all. It is what the Bible says happened and you are assuming they are facts.
How do you as a Bible believer determine that a particular verse was inspired by God?
How do you know which books were intended (by God) to be included in the Bible? How do you confirm that they were not altered from their original writing?
RESPONSE: If you are beginning to raise these central questions, you may not be a Bible believer for long.
Then you would know that he didn't write the book when he was an atheist....as claimed by Christians. Yet more lies for Jesus.
How does that change anything?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
...and the creator of the creator.....??
If the creator is greater than the created, it's plausible that it doesn't need a creator; it exists on a higher plane. Endless causation is a meaningless argument-it's illogical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
Then it's also plausible that the Universe has always existed in some form or other.
It shows how Christians have no qualms about lying for Jesus in saying that he was.
Quote:
If the creator is greater than the created, it's plausible that it doesn't need a creator;....
So you want to claim 'special pleading' for your creator which you will not allow for the universe?
Quote:
A creator can create; can a universe?
Yes of course. New stars are created and destroyed regularly in our universe. But first, you have not demonstrated 'creation' and second if the universe is allowed to have always been there (the same conditions that you are allowing your creator) then there is no need for a creator is there.
You appear to be saying.... Nothing but nothing can come from nothing. Everything must have a creator. There are no exceptions, Those are the rules that MUST apply.
...oh btw. The rules don't apply to my chosen 'creator'.
You are claiming special pleading that you will not allow to your opponant...but can we get back to the subject of the thread please. If the verses of the Bible were divinely inspired what about the divinely inspired verses that mortal man rejected....anyone?
The REAL reason that Christians believe they are inspired: They accept them.
They (Christians) are special and divine and chosen. Therefore, anything that they declare to be divine must be accepted as divine.
If their God appears to hate homosexuals and women and tattoos, then the book must be true. Because THEY hate the same people and things that their God hates. The word itself testifies to being divine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
