What Do You Think The Bible Is?

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]For those that do not believe that the Bible is God's inspired, inerrant, and preserved Word, what evidence do you have to support your disbelief? Do you realize that there have been over 25,000 archaeological finds that confirm people, places and events that are recorded in the Bible? Do you realize that there are hundreds of fulfilled prophecies?ATOMIC_TOAST

Its true, tons of prophecies...check out Ezekiel 26. God told Ezekiel about how the city of Tyre would be destroyed 300 years before it happened:

Ezekiel 26:3b,4

"Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and will bring up many nations against you, as the sea brings up its waves. They shall destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers, and I will scrape her soil from her and make her a bare rock."

That was written in 6th century BC. In 332 BC, Alexander the Great, head of his burgeoning Greek empire [many nations] came against Tyre. The city had two parts, one on shore and the other an island fortress in the sea. They had a great navy but were no match for Alexander's army. They lost the mainland but bunkered up on the island and laughed at Alexander. So in a rage, he leveled the mainland city to the last brick and scraped the rubble into the sea to make a land bridge over to the island, marching in with his ground army and destorying the fortress. Read the rest of the prohpecy in Ezekiel 26. Alexander did everthing to Tyre that the Bible said he would. Nothing in any Greek Oracle or any other holy text is that accurate. Word of God my friends!

We can guess anything, and it will happen.

'One day, the world will be one nation, 1,000 years later the world is one nation', am i god for making such a statement?

its called common sense

if a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

[QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"][QUOTE="blackregiment"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]For those that do not believe that the Bible is God's inspired, inerrant, and preserved Word, what evidence do you have to support your disbelief? Do you realize that there have been over 25,000 archaeological finds that confirm people, places and events that are recorded in the Bible? Do you realize that there are hundreds of fulfilled prophecies?blackregiment

Do you believe the world is less than 12,000 years old?

The age of the earth is not the topic of discussion. For your information, no where in the Bible is the age of the earth given. You don't seem to be very familiar with the Book you are mocking.

I answered your question, I'm simply asking one in return. I have read much of the bible. So how old is the earth?

I answered your question. The Bible does not state the age of the earth. If you would have read it, you would have known that. My opinion on the age of the earth is irrelevant to the truth of the Bible just as your opinion of the Bible is irrelevant to the truth of God's Word, other than as to yoyr eternal destiny that is.

Without faith and the guidance of the Holy Spirit, a non-believer is not able to comprehend the truth of God's Word in the Bible.

I never asked what the bible said about how old the earth is. I asked YOU. So you didn't answer my question, I just want to know. So are you going to answer?

I never asked what the bible said about how old the earth is. I asked YOU. So you didn't answer my question, I just want to know. So are you going to answer?

ElectronicMagic

Tis most deffinately the word of God. Oh and as for the Jesus resurrection being a sequel

3:16And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

3:17And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Matthew 3:16)

None of the other messiahs had that.

Tis most deffinately the word of God. Oh and as for the Jesus resurrection being a sequel

3:16And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

3:17And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Matthew 3:16)

None of the other messiahs had that.

Silenthps

That does not answer the question

ok this is a simple observation that anyone with half a brain can make.

When something HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN TO EXIST, it means it doesnt exist. How simple was that?

snoopeymaster

I cannot believe you actually made that statement. So if someone buries a dime 1ooo feet below some house in America and it remains undiscovered, then according to your false logic, it doesn't exist until it is discovered. Nice logic!

The rest of your post is not worth comment as it is just a demonstration of poor logic and the revaled Word of God.

By the way, what are you going to do when Christ appears in the sky at judgement day? You better think about these things before then because when he comes, it will be to late.

[QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"][QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

[QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"]question for electronicmagic, surely you accept that Jesus existed? fanofazrienoch

No, I don't. There isn't evidence for or against the existence of Jesus.

The bible is the only book from that time period that ever mentions Jesus, that isn't evidence, he's a character in a work of ficition. The bible also talks about Jonah living in the belly of a whale for 300 years, a great flood that covered the world for 40 days and 40 nights, while the only humans that survived lived on a boat with two of each animal gathered from across the world, Jesus turning water into wine, walking on water and bring the dead back to life, is that true? No, not at all.

Of course all of the books in the bible are separate, but they all come together to form one book. The books in the bible are so short that they should be considered chapters. The people who wrote these "books" all had one thing in common, they weren't at all unbias. There is no proof for the existence of Jesus, his birth, his death, his rise from the grave or his divinity.

[QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

I never asked what the bible said about how old the earth is. I asked YOU. So you didn't answer my question, I just want to know. So are you going to answer?

fanofazrienoch

It's a simple question, if he is afraid to answer it then that's all he has to say and I'd drop it.

[QUOTE="snoopeymaster"]

ok this is a simple observation that anyone with half a brain can make.

When something HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN TO EXIST, it means it doesnt exist. How simple was that?

blackregiment

I cannot believe you actually made that statement. So if someone buries a dime 1ooo feet below some house in America and it remains undiscovered, then according to your false logic, it doesn't exist until it is discovered. Nice logic!

The rest of your post is not worth comment as it is just a demonstration of poor logic and the revaled Word of God.

By the way, what are you going to do when Christ appears in the sky at judgement day? You better think about these things before then because when he comes, it will be to late.

Well can you answer this for me If the buy your logic the bible is the one and only word of God are all other religion wrong

I wonder why people feel they need to bring mockery into this thread. *shrug* Mixture of superiority complexes and insecurity, I guess.

In any case, I view the Bible as a very complex holy book.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"][QUOTE="blackregiment"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]For those that do not believe that the Bible is God's inspired, inerrant, and preserved Word, what evidence do you have to support your disbelief? Do you realize that there have been over 25,000 archaeological finds that confirm people, places and events that are recorded in the Bible? Do you realize that there are hundreds of fulfilled prophecies?ElectronicMagic

Do you believe the world is less than 12,000 years old?

The age of the earth is not the topic of discussion. For your information, no where in the Bible is the age of the earth given. You don't seem to be very familiar with the Book you are mocking.

I answered your question, I'm simply asking one in return. I have read much of the bible. So how old is the earth?

I answered your question. The Bible does not state the age of the earth. If you would have read it, you would have known that. My opinion on the age of the earth is irrelevant to the truth of the Bible just as your opinion of the Bible is irrelevant to the truth of God's Word, other than as to yoyr eternal destiny that is.

Without faith and the guidance of the Holy Spirit, a non-believer is not able to comprehend the truth of God's Word in the Bible.

I never asked what the bible said about how old the earth is. I asked YOU. So you didn't answer my question, I just want to know. So are you going to answer?

As I stated, my opinon on the age of the earth is irrelevant to this discussion which is on the truth of the Bible.

I have no problem defending my opinion on the age of the earth but that is not the topic of discussion here.

Of course all of the books in the bible are separate, but they all come together to form one book. The books in the bible are so short that they should be considered chapters. The people who wrote these "books" all had one thing in common, they weren't at all unbias. There is no proof for the existence of Jesus, his birth, his death, his rise from the grave or his divinity.

ElectronicMagic

There are multiple references to the existence of a man named Jesus Christ by several of the world's most accurate historians of that time. The entire historical community accepts His existence. I suggest your read up on historiography and keep the insults to yourself.

As I stated, my opinon on the age of the earth is irrelevant to this discussion which is on the truth of the Bible.

I have no problem defending my opinion on the age of the earth but that is not the topic of discussion here.

blackregiment

If I made a thread asking this exact question will you post your opinion in it? Is that all that is bothering you? The fact that it's not on topic? It's just a simple question.

[QUOTE="ATOMIC_TOAST"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]For those that do not believe that the Bible is God's inspired, inerrant, and preserved Word, what evidence do you have to support your disbelief? Do you realize that there have been over 25,000 archaeological finds that confirm people, places and events that are recorded in the Bible? Do you realize that there are hundreds of fulfilled prophecies?snoopeymaster

Its true, tons of prophecies...check out Ezekiel 26. God told Ezekiel about how the city of Tyre would be destroyed 300 years before it happened:

Ezekiel 26:3b,4

"Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and will bring up many nations against you, as the sea brings up its waves. They shall destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers, and I will scrape her soil from her and make her a bare rock."

That was written in 6th century BC. In 332 BC, Alexander the Great, head of his burgeoning Greek empire [many nations] came against Tyre. The city had two parts, one on shore and the other an island fortress in the sea. They had a great navy but were no match for Alexander's army. They lost the mainland but bunkered up on the island and laughed at Alexander. So in a rage, he leveled the mainland city to the last brick and scraped the rubble into the sea to make a land bridge over to the island, marching in with his ground army and destorying the fortress. Read the rest of the prohpecy in Ezekiel 26. Alexander did everthing to Tyre that the Bible said he would. Nothing in any Greek Oracle or any other holy text is that accurate. Word of God my friends!

We can guess anything, and it will happen.

'One day, the world will be one nation, 1,000 years later the world is one nation', am i god for making such a statement?

its called common sense

if a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

Well, what would be your criteria for a bonafide prophecy? Or do you have a prior committment to such things not being possible? Does a future prediction automatically invalidate itself if its written down before it happens? How then could we ever tell if a real prophecy ever took place? You can't start with the assumtion "prophecy is impossible" then try and build a proof that "prophecy is impossible"...thats as profound as saying 1=1, therefore, 1=1.

[QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

[QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"]question for electronicmagic, surely you accept that Jesus existed? ElectronicMagic

No, I don't. There isn't evidence for or against the existence of Jesus.

The bible is the only book from that time period that ever mentions Jesus, that isn't evidence, he's a character in a work of ficition. The bible also talks about Jonah living in the belly of a whale for 300 years, a great flood that covered the world for 40 days and 40 nights, while the only humans that survived lived on a boat with two of each animal gathered from across the world, Jesus turning water into wine, walking on water and bring the dead back to life, is that true? No, not at all.

[QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

Of course all of the books in the bible are separate, but they all come together to form one book. The books in the bible are so short that they should be considered chapters. The people who wrote these "books" all had one thing in common, they weren't at all unbias. There is no proof for the existence of Jesus, his birth, his death, his rise from the grave or his divinity.

Drakorain

There are multiple references to the existence of a man named Jesus Christ by several of the world's most accurate historians of that time. The entire historical community accepts His existence. I suggest your read up on historiography and keep the insults to yourself.

there is not a single historian whon talked about jesus during the TIME JESUS EXISTED, not after he died.

I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVE ME WRONG

But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

[QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

Of course all of the books in the bible are separate, but they all come together to form one book. The books in the bible are so short that they should be considered chapters. The people who wrote these "books" all had one thing in common, they weren't at all unbias. There is no proof for the existence of Jesus, his birth, his death, his rise from the grave or his divinity.

Drakorain

There are multiple references to the existence of a man named Jesus Christ by several of the world's most accurate historians of that time. The entire historical community accepts His existence. I suggest your read up on historiography and keep the insults to yourself.

Where in that did I make an insult? As far as I've read, the only people to ever write about Jesus that are unbias historians were done well after he had presumably died and not first hand accounts.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"][QUOTE="snoopeymaster"]

ok this is a simple observation that anyone with half a brain can make.

When something HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN TO EXIST, it means it doesnt exist. How simple was that?

blasto65_basic

I cannot believe you actually made that statement. So if someone buries a dime 1ooo feet below some house in America and it remains undiscovered, then according to your false logic, it doesn't exist until it is discovered. Nice logic!

The rest of your post is not worth comment as it is just a demonstration of poor logic and the revaled Word of God.

By the way, what are you going to do when Christ appears in the sky at judgement day? You better think about these things before then because when he comes, it will be to late.

Well can you answer this for me If the buy your logic the bible is the one and only word of God are all other religion wrong

Religion is man's attempt to reach up to God. True Christianity is God, in love and His grace, reaching down to a fallen and sinful man with His plan for salvation. True Christianity is faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Any man-made religion that does not base its doctrine on faith in Christ alone is a false religion.

Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

[QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"][QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

[QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"]question for electronicmagic, surely you accept that Jesus existed? Crushmaster

No, I don't. There isn't evidence for or against the existence of Jesus.

The bible is the only book from that time period that ever mentions Jesus, that isn't evidence, he's a character in a work of ficition. The bible also talks about Jonah living in the belly of a whale for 300 years, a great flood that covered the world for 40 days and 40 nights, while the only humans that survived lived on a boat with two of each animal gathered from across the world, Jesus turning water into wine, walking on water and bring the dead back to life, is that true? No, not at all.

My bible mythology must be a little rusty then. You still didn't make any of that any less absurd.

name me one historian who has recorded the existance of jesus, i hear many saiyng this, but non back it up

there is not a single historian whon talked about jesus during the TIME JESUS EXISTED, not after he died.

I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVE ME WRONG

But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

snoopeymaster

:lol: you're funny, you know that? If you knew anything about historiography, you'd know that, if we used your "nobody talked about him while he was alive" "logic," we wouldn't have any reason to believe Socrates existed either.

Tacitus. Lived twenty years after His death. Roman historian.

Read up on why the historical community does not take your ranting seriously.

Of course all of the books in the bible are separate, but they all come together to form one book. The books in the bible are so short that they should be considered chapters. The people who wrote these "books" all had one thing in common, they weren't at all unbias. There is no proof for the existence of Jesus, his birth, his death, his rise from the grave or his divinity.

ElectronicMagic

[QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

I never asked what the bible said about how old the earth is. I asked YOU. So you didn't answer my question, I just want to know. So are you going to answer?

ElectronicMagic

now, about this "jesus sequel" business, the stone's ink is far too faded to tell the entirety of its original contents, and Dr. Craig Blomberg, distinguished professor of the new testament of Denver Seminary would like to weigh in:

no threat here!
Submitted by Craig Blomberg on Mon, 07/07/2008 - 01:59.
Thanks, Scot, for beating me to the punch on this. :) I just read the wire service announcement in this morning's Denver Post. As usual, someone finds a way to imagine that this would challenge historic Christian faith, since it would supposedly threaten the uniqueness of Jesus' resurrection. In fact, it would do no such thing. What Christians claim is unique is that Jesus of Nazareth was bodily raised from the dead to life unending, not that the idea of a resurrected Messiah was without precedent. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:4actually believes that Christ was raised "according to the Scriptures." Whichever passages he imagined deriving this idea from (Hosea 6:2? Psalm 16:10?) could have suggested themselves to other Jewish writers as well. While there are instances in which the New Testament typologically applies an Old Testament text to a New Testament event in unprecedented ways, suggested first only by the actions of Jesus himself, the more one finds evidence for other Jews thinking similarly (but independently) about their Scriptures, the more credible such an interpretation of the Old Testament becomes, and the more Christian faith is strengthened. Of course, we await the scholarly debate to determine if this tablet in fact says what is being claimed of it. I'm reminded of the claim in the early 1990s about a newly translated Dead Sea Scroll fragment that supposedly talked about a "slain Messiah" when it turned out to be about the Messiah slaying his enemies instead!Dr Craig Blomberg

[QUOTE="blasto65_basic"][QUOTE="blackregiment"][QUOTE="snoopeymaster"]

ok this is a simple observation that anyone with half a brain can make.

When something HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN TO EXIST, it means it doesnt exist. How simple was that?

blackregiment

I cannot believe you actually made that statement. So if someone buries a dime 1ooo feet below some house in America and it remains undiscovered, then according to your false logic, it doesn't exist until it is discovered. Nice logic!

The rest of your post is not worth comment as it is just a demonstration of poor logic and the revaled Word of God.

By the way, what are you going to do when Christ appears in the sky at judgement day? You better think about these things before then because when he comes, it will be to late.

Well can you answer this for me If the buy your logic the bible is the one and only word of God are all other religion wrong

Religion is man's attempt to reach up to God. True Christianity is God, in love and His grace, reaching down to a fallen and sinful man with His plan for salvation. True Christianity is faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Any man-made religion that does not base its doctrine on faith in Christ alone is a false religion.

Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

So what about people before Christ are they dammed for all time

[QUOTE="Drakorain"][QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"]

Of course all of the books in the bible are separate, but they all come together to form one book. The books in the bible are so short that they should be considered chapters. The people who wrote these "books" all had one thing in common, they weren't at all unbias. There is no proof for the existence of Jesus, his birth, his death, his rise from the grave or his divinity.

ElectronicMagic

There are multiple references to the existence of a man named Jesus Christ by several of the world's most accurate historians of that time. The entire historical community accepts His existence. I suggest your read up on historiography and keep the insults to yourself.

Where in that did I make an insult? As far as I've read, the only people to ever write about Jesus that are unbias historians were done well after he had presumably died and not first hand accounts.

That doesn't matter. At all. If they lived 500 or so years after He died, then it would matter a good deal.

By the way, unbias? Do you honestly think bias invalidates an argument? Fact: All truth claims exclude their opposite. Meaning: Everything that is true, is biased.

:lol: this thread is full of funny.

"The bible is inerrant! It say so in the bible!"

The Roman historian Tacitus (56-71AD I think) wrote about Jesus about 30 years or so after his death. That would be like a 60 year old writing about Vietnam nowadays. Is that so hard to believe? That they might get the basics right? Are memories or the ability of Romans to do historical research and interviewing that bad that you couldn't believe a single word of it?ATOMIC_TOAST

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]As I stated, my opinon on the age of the earth is irrelevant to this discussion which is on the truth of the Bible.

I have no problem defending my opinion on the age of the earth but that is not the topic of discussion here.

ElectronicMagic

If I made a thread asking this exact question will you post your opinion in it? Is that all that is bothering you? The fact that it's not on topic? It's just a simple question.

Rather than worrying yourself about my opinion on the age of the earth, jump in the discussion of the Bible. You hve basically said that is good for nothing other than tinder in a fireplace.

Why don't you give us your evidence and proof that it is not the Word of God.

So what about people before Christ are they dammed for all time

blasto65_basic

:lol: this thread is full of funny.

"The bible is inerrant! It say so in the bible!"

Mr_sprinkles

I find this funnier:

"lolololol religions are stupid cause I say so! The Bible is fiction, so Jesus didn't exist! Religious people are deluded! *insert random out-of-context quote as if it means anything here*!"

they were and are seperate books, but the christians compiled them under one cover, and no, they are not "chapters" :lol:. thirdly, there is no such thing as "unbias", but its irrelevant because they are still the best sources on the life of Jesus. fourth, there is evidence from teh Gospels and epistles that Jesus lived, and died, and rose again on easter morning.fanofazrienoch

I never said that they weren't separate books. I never said that they were chapters, I said that they are so short they should be considered chapters. I don't doubt that your sources are the best sources on a fictional character such as Jesus. I'm not telling you not to believe in that hocus pocus, I'm simply saying that there isn't any evidence to support what you are proposing.

[QUOTE="ATOMIC_TOAST"]The Roman historian Tacitus (56-71AD I think) wrote about Jesus about 30 years or so after his death. That would be like a 60 year old writing about Vietnam nowadays. Is that so hard to believe? That they might get the basics right? Are memories or the ability of Romans to do historical research and interviewing that bad that you couldn't believe a single word of it?fanofazrienoch

Ahh, you are right my friend, my bad. My point still stands though. I was born in 79. Does that make it impossible for me to do my homework, ask some vets and write a book about World War II? Thats exactly what Luke did in his Gospel, he went around and interviewed people in the Holy Land about what they saw. Basic research, plain and simple.

The Roman historian Tacitus (56-71AD I think) wrote about Jesus about 30 years or so after his death.ATOMIC_TOAST

i said talk about one who wrote about jesus WHEN HE EXISTED! nnot when he died

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]

:lol: this thread is full of funny.

"The bible is inerrant! It say so in the bible!"

Drakorain

I find this funnier:

"lolololol religions are stupid cause I say so! The Bible is fiction, so Jesus didn't exist! Religious people are deluded! *insert random out-of-context quote as if it means anything here*!"

EM: Your question about the age of the Earth is a red herring. I know exactly what you plan to say. If he answers 6,000 years, you'll dismiss him and his arguments (a fallacy) or call him insane.

If he gives the scientifically accepted age of the earth, you'll ask why he believes that, as "the Bible obviously says otherwise, lol" and trail off on an unrelated point.

It's a meaningless question. Nobody has to answer it.

[QUOTE="ATOMIC_TOAST"]The Roman historian Tacitus (56-71AD I think) wrote about Jesus about 30 years or so after his death.snoopeymaster

i said talk about one who wrote about jesus WHEN HE EXISTED! nnot when he died

read my post right above yours. Whats so important about having a historian live at the same time? I realize its the best scenario....but is a few decades later really that bad? Can Romans and Greeks not do reliable research?

[QUOTE="ElectronicMagic"][QUOTE="blackregiment"]As I stated, my opinon on the age of the earth is irrelevant to this discussion which is on the truth of the Bible.

I have no problem defending my opinion on the age of the earth but that is not the topic of discussion here.

blackregiment

If I made a thread asking this exact question will you post your opinion in it? Is that all that is bothering you? The fact that it's not on topic? It's just a simple question.

Rather than worrying yourself about my opinion on the age of the earth, jump in the discussion of the Bible. You hve basically said that is good for nothing other than tinder in a fireplace.

Why don't you give us your evidence and proof that it is not the Word of God.

If you haven't noticed, I have been talking to others here about this. However I never said I had proof that it isn't the "Word of God". I simply stated that you don't have any evidence, the burden of proof is on those who believe it and are trying to push it as fact to others. If you were to give me proof that it is the "Word of God", I would gladly accept it. But you don't have any evidence. Oh and as for my original question, I understand that you are afraid to answer it. If you have so little faith in what you believe in that you wouldn't answer such a simple question, then okay.

[QUOTE="ATOMIC_TOAST"]The Roman historian Tacitus (56-71AD I think) wrote about Jesus about 30 years or so after his death.snoopeymaster

i said talk about one who wrote about jesus WHEN HE EXISTED! nnot when he died

Considering that about ten percent of the population could write while He was alive. . . .

But I think you ignored me. Contemporary historiography does not require your insane standards. If they did, we would consider Socrates to be a myth. Thirty years makes Tacitus a contemporary and reliable account, one of the best, actually.

By your "logic," we aren't allowed to write about the Civil War.

[QUOTE="blasto65_basic"]

So what about people before Christ are they dammed for all time

fanofazrienoch

What faith it was befor Christ who brought the word of God. Say they worshiped the sun because it gave them food and made them warm.

As far as evidence for God, it is overwhelming. Those that choose to ignore it have their God give free will to ignore it but that doesn't change the truth. Here are just a few.

1.scientific confirmation the origin of the universe coming into existence from a singularity, from nothing as the Bible details.

2.the violation of first principle of cause and effect of the secular origins theory

3.the impossibility of the warm pond theory of amino acid formation

4.the violation of the principle of biogenesis of the secular origins theory of the beginning of life, life from non life

5.the origin of the language of DNA and the intelligence it requires

6.the implausibility of one species evolving into another, macroevolution, which never been observed

7.the circular reasoning of homology, which has never been observed

8.the absence of transitional life forms both today and in the fossil record

9.the Cambrian explosion

10. the development of irreducibly complex organs and biological systems requiring numerous and extremely rare "beneficial mutations" occurring virtually simultaneously

11. the development of human morality

12. the development of human reason

13. the origin of human conscious thought

14. the origin of dark matter

15. the origin of dark energy

16. the violation of the first and second laws of Thermodynamics by the secular theories of the origin of the universe and descent by Darwinism

17. the impossibility of dozens and dozens of finely tuned anthropic principles required for life occurring by random chance

How about all of the evidence for Jesus Christ and the truth of Christianity? The vast majority of scholars, both religious and secular, agree on many of the following points.

1. Jewish religious, cultural, and social life in Biblical times centered around the temple. The Jewish faith, traditions, and temple worship were extremely important to the Jewish people in that historical period and to become an outcast for not-conforming to the communal beliefs and religious teaching was a dreaded event resulting in the loss of status, family relationships, and ability to work or even speak with others in the community. Why did the followers of Christ, Jewish people, risk becoming outcasts from their community?

2. Jesus was an actual historical figure. There is a large body of evidence both religious writers and from secular writers that confirm His existence and followers.

3. Jesus and His disciples were born Jews and trained in the Jewish religion and traditions and received scorn by the Jewish community.

4. Jesus was a teacher that taught high ethical standards, some of which went against Jewish tradition.

5. Jesus claimed to be the Messiah which was offensive to the Jewish religious leaders.

6. Jesus claimed to be God which was considered blaspheme by the Jewish religious leaders.

7. Jesus prophesized his own death and resurrection and is the only religious or world leader to have ever done that.

8. Jesus was hated by the religious leaders for his teachings and extraordinary claims.

9. Jesus was crucified and died from the rigors of crucifixion.

10. Jesus was buried.

11. Jesus´ death initially caused the disciples to despair, lose hope, and retreat into hiding.

12. Jesus' tomb was sealed and heavily guarded by those that persecuted Him.

13. Jesus' tomb was discovered to be empty a few days later.

14. The Romans and Jews did not and could not produce Jesus' body which if they could have, would have ended the Disciples claims of the resurrected Christ and destroyed their evangelistic efforts.

15. The Disciples had real experiences that they believed to be literal experiences of the risen Jesus.

16. The Bible records hundreds of prophecies that were fulfilled, both regarding Jesus' life and places and events.

17. The Bible records over 500 eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ. If this was untrue, then why did they not speak out and refute the Disciples claims?

18. The Disciples were transformed from doubters who were afraid to identify with Jesus, to bold proclaimers of his death and resurrection, even being willing to die for this belief.

19. The early Disciples had nothing to gain, as in financially, power, status, longevity of life, or protection from prosecution, by choosing to preach the Gospel and indeed had everything to lose instead.

20. The resurrection of Jesus was central to their message and teachings.

21. The resurrection was proclaimed in Jerusalem where Jesus was crucified and where the empty tomb was located.

22. The Christian church was born and grew with Sunday the primary day of worship. Why?

23. James, Jesus´ skeptical brother, was converted by the resurrection. Why?

24. Paul, the great persecutor of Christianity, was converted by the resurrection and abandoned his high position in Jewish society. Why?

25. There were 10 periods of persecution of early Christians under the Roman Emperors Nero (Roman emperor AD 54–68 ), Domitian (Roman emperor AD 81–96), Trajan (Roman emperor AD 98–117), Marcus Aurelius (Roman emperor AD 161–180 ), Septimius Severus (Roman emperor AD 193–211), Maximinus, Gaius Julius Verus (Roman emperor AD 235–238 ) , Decius (Roman emperor AD 249–251), Valerian (Roman emperor AD 253–260), Aurelian (Roman emperor AD 270–275), and Diocletian (Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus, reigned AD 284–305) and Maximian (reigned AD 285–305) who governed as emperors together. Why did the Christians choose death rather than recount their belief in Christ?

26. Many early Church fathers and Christians were martyred for their belief in Christ rather than recanting their faith to save their lives.

27. The Christian faith grew and spread rapidly in spite of intense persecution. Christianity spread rapidly throughout the Roman Empire because people noticed that Christians lived a very different and more hopeful life, as compared to the debauchery and hopelessness of pagan Rome. Christianity was a rational choice for people seeking a better life and hope.

28. There have been numerous attempts, by those opposed to the Gospel, to destroy the Word of God as recorded in the Bible throughout history yet it has somehow been preserved.

29. Millions of lives have been changed from despair to hope by Christian faith especially in areas where Christians are persecuted the most. This continues today as studies of evangelization have shown that people come to Christianity because it changes lives and delivers results which atheistic worldviews cannot.

EM: Your question about the age of the Earth is a red herring. I know exactly what you plan to say. If he answers 6,000 years, you'll dismiss him and his arguments (a fallacy) or call him insane.

If he gives the scientifically accepted age of the earth, you'll ask why he believes that, as "the Bible obviously says otherwise, lol" and trail off on an unrelated point.

It's a meaningless question. Nobody has to answer it.

Drakorain

It was just a simple question, I'm not forcing him to answer it. I answered his question, so I thought it was only fair that he answer mine. I was just trying to see what kind of person he was and now I know.

If one is having difficulty finding God, it is their problem, not God's. God wants us to come to Him through our own free will. This requires faith. Only in a world where faith is difficult can faith exist. Scripture describes God as a hidden God. One has to make an effort of faith to find Him. There are many clues they can follow as God has revealed Himself in nature, His Word, His Son Jesus, fulfilled prophecy, our conscience, and through the Holy Spirit to those that have faith.

If finding God was easy, for example, if He gave man more clues than He has, then we really would not be free to make a choice about Him. If He gave us less clues, then no one could find God. If God "appeared" in the sky one day to everyone, as absolute proof of His existance, then man would not have the freedom to accept or deny Him anymore than they can deny that the sun exists because we can see it in the sky.

God created man with free will. If finding God did not require faith and did not require our effort to seek Him, free will would not exist. We have a free will to either seek God or choose not to.

God gives us just enough evidence that those that want Him and seek him can find Him. Those who want to follow the clues will. Those who do not want a personal relationship with Him, will not.

Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

The Bible tells us, "Seek and ye shall find".

Mat 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
Mat 7:8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

The Bible does not teach that everybody will find Him, nor does it teach that nobody will find Him. Some will find Him. Who? Those that seek Him. Those whose hearts are set on finding Him and seek Him. Who will not find Him? Those with hardened hearths that choose not to seek Him.
Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Although the Christian faith is not based purely on evidence, it is definitely supported by evidence. Faith is not about turning off the brain and merely relying on the heart, or squashing reason in favor of emotion.

Christian faith is about seeking and knowing Jesus with all facets of the human character.

There are Christians that have what I call a "pure faith" or "beautiful faith". Some refer to this as "blind faith", but I think it is better described as pure faith because of its purity and beauty. They have faith and do not need evidence, other that God's Word in the Bible, to support their faith. I respect these Christians. Others, require evidence to address doubts or questions they have. God gave us a mind to reason and there is nothing wrong with seeking answers. I call this a "calculated faith" based examining a preponderance of the evidence. For me, I needed to research the evidence. While I am not a scholar, over the years, I have studied the evidence, from the Bible, from prophecy, from the manuscript evidence, from ancient writers and historians (both religious and secular), from archeology, from biology, from chemistry, from astronomy, from cosmology, from paleontology, from sociology, from changed lives, psychology, from philosophy, from logic, etc. and I have put it the question of trial. After years of study and a sincere desire for the truth, wherever it should lead, I reached the conclusion that Jesus Christ is who he claims to be, the Son of God who came to this earth about 2,000 years ago to offer true and lasting hope for mankind. I spiritually and intellectually believe, by a preponderance of the evidence, that God exists, that the Bible is true, and that Jesus is his Son.

This is my personal experience and I am not a scholar. An interesting fact however is that many of the strongest advocates of the truth of Christianity are scholars that were formerly atheists that set out to "disprove" Christianity once and for all. After years of studying the evidence, these scholars concluded that Christianity was true and committed their lives to serving Christ.

Regardless of what one believes, we can rest assured that everyone will eventually see God at Judgment Day. If they have not accepted Christ beforehand however, it will be too late.

2Co 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Psa 63:11 But the king shall rejoice in God; every one that sweareth by him shall glory: but the mouth of them that speak lies shall be stopped.

Ecc 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
Ecc 12:14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

[QUOTE="Drakorain"]

EM: Your question about the age of the Earth is a red herring. I know exactly what you plan to say. If he answers 6,000 years, you'll dismiss him and his arguments (a fallacy) or call him insane.

If he gives the scientifically accepted age of the earth, you'll ask why he believes that, as "the Bible obviously says otherwise, lol" and trail off on an unrelated point.

It's a meaningless question. Nobody has to answer it.

ElectronicMagic

It was just a simple question, I'm not forcing him to answer it. I answered his question, so I thought it was only fair that he answer mine. I was just trying to see what kind of person he was and now I know.

He's a very conservative fundamentalist Christian who apparently has a thing for proselytizing on Internet forums. But his character is irrelevant.

[QUOTE="snoopeymaster"]

[QUOTE="ATOMIC_TOAST"]The Roman historian Tacitus (56-71AD I think) wrote about Jesus about 30 years or so after his death.Drakorain

i said talk about one who wrote about jesus WHEN HE EXISTED! nnot when he died

Considering that about ten percent of the population could write while He was alive. . . .

But I think you ignored me. Contemporary historiography does not require your insane standards. If they did, we would consider Socrates to be a myth. Thirty years makes Tacitus a contemporary and reliable account, one of the best, actually.

i just find it weird that 20 historians lived around this time period and NON mentioned him

The Roman historian Tacitus (56-71AD I think) wrote about Jesus about 30 years or so after his death. That would be like a 60 year old writing about Vietnam nowadays. Is that so hard to believe? That they might get the basics right? Are memories or the ability of Romans to do historical research and interviewing that bad that you couldn't believe a single word of it?ATOMIC_TOAST

Just look at Elvis. 50 years after his death and we've got people going around claiming the man enver died. It doesn't take long for history to become erroneous.

Bersides, Tacitus was born in 56 AD. Not only was the work you're referring to written in 116 AD (that's about, what, 72 years after Jesus's estimated death?), but Tacitus himself was never alive before Jesus was executed. As a result he is not a contemporary source.

[QUOTE="Drakorain"][QUOTE="snoopeymaster"]

[QUOTE="ATOMIC_TOAST"]The Roman historian Tacitus (56-71AD I think) wrote about Jesus about 30 years or so after his death.snoopeymaster

i said talk about one who wrote about jesus WHEN HE EXISTED! nnot when he died

Considering that about ten percent of the population could write while He was alive. . . .

But I think you ignored me. Contemporary historiography does not require your insane standards. If they did, we would consider Socrates to be a myth. Thirty years makes Tacitus a contemporary and reliable account, one of the best, actually.

i just find it weird that 20 historians lived around this time period and NON mentioned him

Thats partly because there were so many other Jewish military leaders claiming to be the Messiah and starting armed revolts, like the duo of Bar-Kochba and Rabbi Akiba, a few years later. Jesus was entirely peaceful for his entire ministry....not the sort of activity that gets you a spot on the evening news. You've got to take into account the fact that all the Jewish scholars of that time had interpreted Daniel's prophecy of 70 weeks of years to be ending during this time and all of them expected the Messiah to come. There was tremedous clamor and anticipation of the Messiah's coming and there were plenty of crooked and misguided people who were willing to take advantage of the atmosphere.