Questions for a Christian?

Crossover
Theist
Posts: 206
Joined: 2007-09-06
User is offlineOffline
Questions for a Christian?

Got any? When I say questions I mean doctrinal questions. Like "why does God allow epole to starve" or "explain you wacky view of three Gods in one"....not science stuff and not debate stuff. This is for people who would actually like to learn more about the people they have come to disagree with. I don't want this to be a debate...just Q & A. Later I will post a questions for athiest topic, where I will ask you questions and you will answer them for me...no debates, just Q & A.

 

So, any questions???????

My Master has no desire to be merely victor in a debate: he did not come into the world to fight a battle of logic just
for the sake of winning it. --Charles Spurgeon


Joker
atheist
Joker's picture
Posts: 180
Joined: 2010-07-23
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:Crossover

Old Seer wrote:

Crossover wrote:

Got any? When I say questions I mean doctrinal questions. Like "why does God allow epole to starve" or "explain you wacky view of three Gods in one"....not science stuff and not debate stuff. This is for people who would actually like to learn more about the people they have come to disagree with. I don't want this to be a debate...just Q & A. Later I will post a questions for athiest topic, where I will ask you questions and you will answer them for me...no debates, just Q & A.

 

So, any questions???????

We,re on our own. "We" allow people to starve. We devised a system on our own that cannot/will not solve the problems it created for itself. The world follows the wrong one, it's one the leaders created, mainly, they took the place of God and became it.

 

Oh, really how did they 'take the roll of god and become it'? I am genuinely curious about this claim. Not to mention the fact that you deity apparently is unwilling, despite all the prayers offered to it, to give people sufficient food except through human agents. IE your deity is apparently either incompetent, lazy, or simply nonexistent


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1263
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Would jesus have died of old

Would jesus have died of old age if he hadn't been crucified? 


Jean Chauvin
Theistard
Jean Chauvin's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2010-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Hi OP

Hi OP

I will help you regarding why Jesus walked on water and why we can't.

the term miracle is not found in the Bible since it was established as an old english 9th century term. The term miracle is a kind of empty ambiguous term.

The term used for miracles is signs and wonders.

Thus according to the Scripture in I Corinthains 1:22:

Quote:
For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom;

Thus Jesus Christ was demonstrating His Messianic Sovereignty for the purposes of demonstration of His Deity (Logically, the one that creates everything can by default control everything) and for His chosen 12 to write about what happen for the purpose of wonder to those who have been given faith by Christ (Galtians 2:16). Another reason was because the Canon had yet to be completed thus this was part of the apostles wonder.

This is where I differ from most typical Chrisitans. Miracles are a buzz word, everything is now a miracle. A baby's birth, Somebody being rescued spiritually from hell, if it rains when there is drought.

Since Canon is completed MIRACLES NO LONGER HAPPEN TODAY. lol. Let me quality this.

by miracle, I talking about the purpose of a sign and wonder for demonstration via the Jewish people. Signs and miracles don't happen anymore.

Now, technically speaking, while God can still heal, intervene, but not in the sense of the technical understanding of what a miracle use to entail.

As of now, we simply refer to it as God's grace and Sovereigy.

Logically speaking, since "miracles" are no longer existent today, then logically you cannot walk on water.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).


Sage_Override
atheistBlogger
Sage_Override's picture
Posts: 582
Joined: 2008-10-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Would jesus have died

Quote:
Would jesus have died of old age if he hadn't been crucified?

 

I'd imagine he would have spent a good portion of his life walking around Jerusalem getting shit faced off of his own miracle wine and being one of the most sensational street acts of his time.  In his later years, he would have stayed at home eating bread and fish sandwiches.  For jollies, he'd scare the hell out of random roman soldiers by jumping out at them and going "WOOOOOOOHAAAAAA!!!"  They'd get tired of his crap after awhile and put him in the stockades, place a paper hat on his head that said "lord and savior my ass" and have the townsfolk throw rotten fruit at him for the rest of his days.

"When the majority believes in what is false, the truth becomes a quest." - Me


Deek (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
First, as an atheist, I took

First, as an atheist, I took Socrates' advice to "Follow the evidence wherever it leads". I decided to look at the evidence from both science and Scripture fully expecting to vindicate my atheistic orientation.

In addition I happily accepted the advice of the apostle Paul to "Test everything; hold on to that which is good" (1 Thess. 5:21). This, too, would likely support my atheist faith.

The end result was similar to what Antony Flew experienced; a gradual transition from atheism to theism.

The vehicles from science that supported a theistic worldview were the theological implications of the big bang; the information content of DNA; the complexity of life; the fine-tuning of the universe; the fact that we are self-aware; the failings of Darwinism (i.e. the trilobite is highly complex yet serves as an index fossil for the Cambrian period); the historical accuracy of the bible based on higher criticism, the recognition of "right" and "wrong", and an "old-earth" perspective to name a few.

What I discovered is that there is a mountain of misinformation on both sides of this issue. My assumption at the onset was that if God created the universe and set the laws of physics in place that would make him the author of science, and if God inspired the bible that would make him the author of scripture.

Therefore if science and scripture both have the same author they should not contradict each other. However when I did find contradictions further investigation revealed either bad science, bad theology, or both. And there is a great deal of "both". Presuppositions seem to be at the heart of the conflict.

And now, how would you answer the question, "Why do you not believe?"

Rick


Jean Chauvin
Theistard
Jean Chauvin's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2010-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Hey Deek

Deek,

Quote:
First, as an atheist, I took Socrates' advice to "Follow the evidence wherever it leads". I decided to look at the evidence from both science and Scripture fully expecting to vindicate my atheistic orientation.

What kind of evidence? Socrates was NOT an empiricist at all. So if you're using Socrates as an example, then logically you cannot use empiricism. Try to guess what Socrates epistemology really was.

I thess 5:21 says test everything and hold fast to that which is true. you did the first part but forgot the 2nd part.

Quote:
at I discovered is that there is a mountain of misinformation on both sides of this issue. My assumption at the onset was that if God created the universe and set the laws of physics in place that would make him the author of science, and if God inspired the bible that would make him the author of scripture.

Let me help you. Since all knowledge is only possible via the Creator of Knowledge, and since science is the pursuit of knowledge, then logically God would be the creator of knowledge. By knowlelge, I mean a variable with absolute zero error.

This is a pretty sad post. You have not given me any logic for your position but just had a picnik one day and thought this stuff up lol.

Tea anyone?

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).


Joker
atheist
Joker's picture
Posts: 180
Joined: 2010-07-23
User is offlineOffline
michael607 wrote:If everyone

michael607 wrote:

If everyone walked on water, raised people from the dead, healed people, turned water into wine, transfigure, etc. Then we could all claim that we were the Son of God and divine or Apostles. The whole point of miracles where to prove that Jesus was the Son of God and that the Apostles were his representative (since some of them did miracles also) These things have been recorded in the Bible and He closed the cannon and will not do them again. I am only speaking from one "theist" point of view because "theists" don't have a unified belief system. As I wrote in another forum, there are somewhere in the range of 30,000 Christian denominations. If we did have a unified belief system there wouldn't be 30,000 Christian denominations. I can only speak from a Reformed Theology view (Calvinist). Oh yes.. Calvinist. Hated by atheist and Christian alike

Problem with this argument though is that at least in the old testament the God of the bible and the Torah had no problem performing Miracle-Offs with other deities in the area. The implications that I got looking at it seemed to be something closer to them believing that the other gods did in fact exist, just that they were weaker than their own God. Looking at the Torah it would seem to be more of a kind of trade "Ok, we agree to worship you, and you alone, in exchange you protect us and answer us EACH TIME we call on you, fair, fair."

Not to mention that if there really is a devil and they really wanted to fuck with things, why not pick someone, make them think that they were the chosen on of say...Prometheus. Have them able to conjure fire with a snap of their fingers, bring scientific insights and creations with a gesture and be able to be submitted to the toughest tests to the point where James Randi would be writing the guy a mountain of checks. For a lot of people, these things would go a long way to prove something, but instead the argument seems to be 'well, we don't DO miracles anymore. Even though proving the abilities wouldn't be horribly difficult, apparently God just doesn't want to or care enough to.'


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10717
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I wonder if jean realises

I wonder if jean realises he's become the resident clown. Puzzled

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


3B
3B's picture
Posts: 2
Joined: 2012-05-31
User is offlineOffline
Susan wrote:Crossover

Susan wrote:
Crossover wrote:

 

First, God created man to glorify Him. Why did he create us with the forknowlege that we would sin (not only that, but with the forknowlege of knowing whom he would choose to save!)? My personal belief is that God did that because that glorifies Him more. Christians dont (or shouldnt) say that God is merciful for creating us...but rather he is merciful for offering us a way of salvation. I can only say that God sees that He can get more glory out of the way He did it than any other way.

Am I understanding this correctly?

You believe the god created man just so he would have someone to glorify and worship him?

No, that's true. According to the Christian doctrine God created man kind for the purpose of worshiping him. In the bible it basically says to abandon your family, your worldly possessions, all your personal needs and focus all your thoughts on God.
What most Christians think "Heaven" is with streets paved in gold where you will live in paradise forever is completely wrong.

That concept was one of the many things added to Christianity to make it more appealing to the masses. The ACTUAL text says you will be rewarded with a place in heaven where you will sing praises to God for all eternity.
Eternal slavery was a hard sell so they edited the story a little. Eye-wink
 

 

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. ~George Carlin.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
yer not taking into accounts

Crossover wrote:

Got any? When I say questions I mean doctrinal questions. Like "why does God allow epole to starve" or "explain you wacky view of three Gods in one"....not science stuff and not debate stuff. This is for people who would actually like to learn more about the people they have come to disagree with. I don't want this to be a debate...just Q & A. Later I will post a questions for athiest topic, where I will ask you questions and you will answer them for me...no debates, just Q & A.

 

So, any questions???????

the fact of free will. It's Gods will that one has free will. If floks are starving then it's because of the systems that people have created. "God" on one account is the values on which we relate to each other. If social values are set in materialism then someone is going to be starving. Moreover-if we're going to be animalistic and/or predatory upon the lives of others as the people-made systems have it then what can one expect. The :"God" in these cases is "we". What do you say in this regard.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Because

wavefreak wrote:
Why hasn't anybody walked on water since Jesus did it?

That sort of thing has an unknown as to how it can be done---the only viable answer is-it takes a certain presence of mind,or mentality, to override physical laws. IF JC had that particular ability it was/is because of his mind set. Today we are of a different mental state that won't allow such things. I have no idea how it works but if it does it takes a different mental attitude. Maybe along with a mind that is at peace and tranquility it becomes possible. We'll be finding out for sure at some future time.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
I'm not a Theist, Deist, or Atheist

Joker wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

Crossover wrote:

Got any? When I say questions I mean doctrinal questions. Like "why does God allow epole to starve" or "explain you wacky view of three Gods in one"....not science stuff and not debate stuff. This is for people who would actually like to learn more about the people they have come to disagree with. I don't want this to be a debate...just Q & A. Later I will post a questions for athiest topic, where I will ask you questions and you will answer them for me...no debates, just Q & A.

 

So, any questions???????

We,re on our own. "We" allow people to starve. We devised a system on our own that cannot/will not solve the problems it created for itself. The world follows the wrong one, it's one the leaders created, mainly, they took the place of God and became it.

 

Oh, really how did they 'take the roll of god and become it'? I am genuinely curious about this claim. Not to mention the fact that you deity apparently is unwilling, despite all the prayers offered to it, to give people sufficient food except through human agents. IE your deity is apparently either incompetent, lazy, or simply nonexistent

Ok, who's making the decisions on this planet and how things operate. Wouldn't it be the ones in charge, and, isn't this system that'sin place devised by people at a previous time. People can starve because of drought or disaster but on the whole it's caused by decisions made by people. Civilization is an idea or proposal made by people, and on it's account people starve. The idea of civilization has proven times over the it is an inadequate system that can provide the needs of all. Civilization is a predatory system---what else can be the result od predatory practices. Could it be that certain people have taken the place of God and forced others to follow them and theiir programs of living---I say it's so.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
No

zarathustra wrote:

Would jesus have died of old age if he hadn't been crucified? 

No


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1263
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
follow-up

Old Seer wrote:
zarathustra wrote:
Would jesus have died of old age if he hadn't been crucified?
No

  1. Is that to say at some point jesus would have stopped aging?  If so, I would submit that point, jesus would no longer qualify as "human", as humans continue to age until natural death.
  2. How would the "sacrifice" have then be accomplished?  That is to say, how would humanity have been "saved", if god's "only son" were not killed?
  3. How do you know this?

 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1263
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Jesus' Post-Crucifixion Itinerary

In Luke 23:-40-43,  jesus says to the "good" thief, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."

This implies the following sequence of events between Good Friday and Pentecost:

  1. Jesus died
  2. Jesus went to heaven (presumably without his physical body, and with the Good Thief in tow) before the day was over
    • According to some versions of christianity, jesus descended into hell to liberate the souls that had been suffering, but were now absolved by his death
  3. Jesus returned < 3 days later to earth (presumably the sealed tomb, which he then exited)
  4. Jesus returned 40 days later to heaven -- with his physical body

Do you as a christian accept this chronology -- and that it makes sense at all?

 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3470
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:zarathustra

Old Seer wrote:

zarathustra wrote:

Would jesus have died of old age if he hadn't been crucified? 

No

so why the hell did he grow to adulthood?  is 30 the cut-off for aging if you're a god-man?  what a crock.  everything ages.  everything dies.  living is nothing more than slow decay.  even the buddha knew this.  will you offer people lies?

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


vBlueSki
atheist
vBlueSki's picture
Posts: 12
Joined: 2012-12-10
User is offlineOffline
Accuracy

What about the accuracy of the bible? I'm sure that there is irrefutable to the earth being much older than 6,000-7,000 years old. And if the bible is inaccurate where do we know to begin. John Allegro has done extensive studies on the Dead Sea Scrolls (original bible) and has found it to be filled with the use of hallucinogens. This would explain the mythical stories of a talking snake, a parted ocean, a burning bush, a great flood that killed everyone except Noah and his family, Jesus walking on water, some guy killing an army with a skull of a goat, origins of languages, and so on. To me, thinking rationally, I can assume that these things probably didn't happen. And if they did, there would be no way to prove any of them. Therefore it is harder for me to believe them.

Not saying that I either want to believe or disbelieve these claims, it's just much harder to know in an age of intelligence. Much love though, a never stop thinking about the wonder of our existence. No matter what you believe.

Eternity wouldn't be much of an experience.