2 Tim. 3:1-3, Rev. 3:16 for 2

With that statement, I wonder why I should even bother.  Instead of considering the idea that it might actually be written, you automatically assume that I have twisted the words to mean what I want them to mean.  I can just as easily assume that if you find that the words were not twisted by me, that you would ulitmately twist them around to mean what you'd want them to mean so as to make it look like you weren't wrong. 

The weather thing was not referenced above.  It is written in many many places of the Bible including Matthew, Romans, Hebrews, Revelation, and I think Micah amidst others in the OT.  it talks about Floods, famines, quakes, storms, etc.  Yes, they've always been happening.. It mentions a hightening of their frequencies which statistically has been shown.  The ind. rev. is an application that has been suggested by theorists and of course it is still only a theory that it was the cause of them.

Research violence statistics in schools and in general.  Research the rise in broken families and teen; 'drugs, suicide, drinking, crime, etc'.  Granted some is due to parents allowing it as well.  That's why you need to carefully research the sources of your statistics as well. 

I didn't suggest any because it's across the board.  It possibly applies to most if not all... I dont' know that for sure.

They wouldn't, that's the point.  Where do you get acknowlegement of superstitions from that?  I think this is sufficient evidence to the fact that you manipulate what is put in front of you to accomodate your belief.

true

no one can prove that anything is impossible.  It's proving a negative.  It just doesn't work.

Using the process of the scientific method is something I suggested in the past.  It seemed all shied away from it rather quickly however.  It might actually require some active investigation on your part. 

Why would you want me to "magically prove" anything to you?  Are you saying magic is real?

I'm glad you said that.  I never do that.  When people ask me why Christ and not another following, I explain what made sense to me and what didn't with reference to what was claimed in each belief.  Anyone of another belief wanting me to follow them, I ask them for evidence, just as you.

Your assumption that my belief is strictly based off of emotional conviction alone proves my statement.

Congruency in Archeology, history and storyline in general.

Who else did I say was wrong?  I never said anyone else wasn't hearing a voice of a spirit either.  I'm not saying my God is anymore real than another persons god.  That persons god could in fact be a real spirit.  Who knows.  The question is whether my God is the Almighty, maker of heaven and Earth or not.   I welcome anyone of another faith, including the atheist religion to challenge what I know, but I do suggest doing it logically and with an open mind. 

Right.  Is that your only excuse?  You obviously haven't followed my forums very long.   I haven't studied appologetics and if those excuses don't work on me, they won't work on you and therefore, I don't use them.   

Would you accept for some questions you may ask that I might not know all the answers?? and that not knowing all the answers does not mean God isn't real or that I don't have enough to base my belief on? 

You've already decided that God is non-existant, so why should I even bother making an effort with you?  What would you want Him to demonstrate and why that particular way?  Why would seeking Him out not be just as good of a way?  All serious questions looking for a logical answer

Extra-religious evidence please.  Otherwise, your only basis is religion, to which then I would agree.

er... I dont' know.  can you follow God if you don't know Him?  Can you follow anyone if you don't know who they are? 

let's just say, you have to first be able to consider the possiblity of God being real.  then you can persue it from there.  Of course there'd have to be some basis for your consideration.  That is where we seem to be stuck.  I'm not sure what could possibly get you to the point of even considering.

You seem to be saying that I have to know God before I can know God.

I have no problem with the possibility. In fact, I'd kind of like it to be the case. I've met some really cool believers. The problem I have is from peole who ask me to stop using reason and replace it with their version of faith.

Unfortunately, the only proof of God that we seem to have is the book that humans wrote about him. That leads me to believe more that God was a construct of the writers of that book.

The first one is obvious but I see no reference in 3:16.

The thing is, even if it is written in your scripture you by no means have proven a thing (unless specific concise details are given about particular events, future dates, names, places, etc). Floods, famines, quakes, storms, etc.. are a fact of living on a geothermically active planet with an atmosphere and all you can show is small increases in frequencies on very short periods of time with respect to this planet's history. 200-1000 years of weather reports isn't much in comparison to the 40,000+ year cycles this planet may go through (or just in general). Some of those are blatently obvious realities which seems like a reversal in an attempt to fit facts with incongruent scripture, you're extrapolating events in the future for which no scientist agrees with in certainty. I seriously doubt there's been any increase in quakes or famine with respect to population size.

Well I just checked statistic rates for suicide and they're down. Drug abuse is both comical and tragic at the same time; you have reclassifications of what constitutes drugs (and drug abuse) which encompasses more "abusers" on one hand and an increase of new types of drugs (which are pushed onto the public for profit) on the other so of course usage will go up. These statistics are different for every country as well, so which ones are you citing because they're not all going up? These also depend on what you consider a "broken family"; people who divorce in a social setting where it's acceptable to leave the husband that beats you is much better than one that would force someone to stay in such an inhospitable setting. I'd argue that families are no more broken then they were at any other point in history, the only difference is that you have people no longer affraid of taking action. 

Your subjective interpretation of subjective subjects. If you mean a change in the social structure of society I'd agree, for better or for worse, who's to say? 

Well I'll need something a little harder than some inconcise scripture and a low statistical correlation.

So that automatically makes a man rising from the dead, a virgin birth, miracles, and god true? Guess I better go research every fictional book ever written that has congruency in history as well.

Because your logic entails that I first believe in order to believe; that I must be uncritical of what I'm looking at and just accept it from your perspective. I don't seek any world view out, I filter information and fit it together as best I can through what seems congruent. Your god had no qualms with displaying his power to individuals and mass audiences in scripture so I don't see what the problem is.

Truthfully there is nothing that could 100% remove all doubt from my mind and to do so would be tantamount to pure mind control. Bringing back a lost loved one for a day would be sufficient I would think but it would still leave a 0.1% possibility of a naturalistic advanced lifeform decieving me or delusion. If one cannot be in heaven and doubt or question things as they can on earth then I want no part of it, it's worse than nonexistance, I might as well be hooked up to an IV drip of meth 24/7 because it'd do me just as much good cognitively. Your diety very well could have all the answers and feed those answers directly into our minds but if I have no ability to test those answers myself then there is no beauty or purpose left for me. 

You asking me to come up with a situation as to what would make me believe would be somewhere in the ballpark of asking you how your god could prove his sovereignty over reality instead of being a middleman somewhere in creation... even he might be decieved... how could you possibly know for sure?

Sorry but blood remains nothing special. The idea of its importance come from superstious primitive who had no idea of circulation. And that ignorance of circulation extends to their god who was equally ignorant. There stupid god didn't even know about genes.

You do not know the meaning of the word suicide? If you read your theology his death was REQUIRED for the remission of sin. If he had not died then no remission of sin. Therefore he had to die. Therefore a suicide mission. Look up the word.

You are apparently ignorant in this matter. Educated people know prophesy is bullshit. Educated people also know that all those religions had the SAME events as claimed by Christians were duplicated by their gods in their past which would be thousands of years before Christians claimed the same thing for their god. Any ratoinal person sees the Christians copied the stories for their chosen god-man. God-men were a dime a dozen in the good old days.

Nothing you do will ever bring you happiness forever.  Everything's pointless.  (ref. Ecclesiastes)  How much more must something that can ultimately bring the assurance of eternal happiness be worth?

Cap doesn't want to face that his fictional super hero is merely a product of human emagination. It a refusal to accept one's own finite existence.

Does anyone really think their god(s) are going to be remembered by anthing after our species goes extinct, much less 50 billion years from now?

But from a moral standpoint it is just as horrible.

First off, my dad and my mom did not consult their sperm and egg and ask it if it wanted to become me. The reality is that they had sex and that is why I am here.

BUT, if one is to take the theist model as an example, I STILL WASN'T ASKED, and I didn't ask anyone to kill themselves for me, nor would I.

In reality, any SANE person would find it disturbing if they were followed by a spouse, girlfriend, or fan who had a knife to their wrist and said, "Look at me, I am going to kill myself for you".

There is nothing selfless about the Jesus myth. It is nothing more than a super hero construct to gain club members, and a sick selfish concept at that.

The claimed "sacrifice" is not designed to promote freedom of religion or individuality. The main goal is to get you to believe that you get to kiss the ass of God forever if you follow him. What they gloss over is that COMES AT THE EXPENSE OF TREATING OUTSIDERS LIKE TRASH TO BE THROWN IN THE GARBAGE.

It is a self centered concept all about bowing to the authority of one.

I only hope that Cap wakes up out of this delusion before their entire life is wasted on defending it.

I dont' know Brian, from what I've seen of your posts;  It seems to me, unlike some others on here you "hold a position with no evidence". 

It was to the 'lukewarm' or 'not-really-a-follower' Christian reference.    Might need a read of the chapter for contextual reference.  Sorry 'bout that.

Those specifically maybe.  It never said in scripture that 'all of the above is going to happen all at the same time'  nor did it give any time frame for when it was to happen.  Bible explains this and why.

You've I'm sure heard of the 'hockey stick' in the temperature graph and how that correlates to a noticable increase in extremes regarding to weather. 

It is only a theory, but the current weather patterns don't seem to coenside with historical weather patterns.  There are a few different theories revolving around this topic as to why.

compared to when?

generally speaking

again, generally speaking. 

I wasn't referencing to social acceptance.  It's funny you mention that however because socail acceptance is part of a cause.

You would need to take it all into consideration and generally come to a conlcusion that there is a "general" increase.  You seem to have concluded that.  I never said it was extreme.  I never stated any specifics to why there would be an increase.  Just that there is.  Now you see it. 

again you do see it then.

I guess better or worse is perspective.  Biblically.... what would you say from that perspective?

This is where I ask what you would be looking for and from what method you'd like to base the research that would be relevent to the topic.

It may not hurt for a start.  I would never suggest to anyone NOT to read anything else that might contradict the truth.  In my opinion, it makes you stronger in the truth to do that.  (truth meaning what is real, not what you or I assume to be real)

is belief all there is to it?  It is said that "Satan believes in God" 

I'd say you should start with something that might make you consider the concept of believing.

woah, I never said that!

maybe that he promised it won't happen like that until Christ's return?  He still shows himself... only to those who know Him.  You have to want to know Him first.  How can you do that if you don't even have a reason to consider belief?  We might want to battle that front first.

who said 100% of doubt had to be removed?  I'd be lying if I said I never doubted or may never doubt again.  I've seen enough to overcome those doubts when they pass.  To remove all doubt would be to have 100% faith.  Bible says faith the size of a mustard seed will move mountains.  That's hardly 100% faith or even half the removal of doubt.  If you didn't have any doubt, you wouldn't need any faith.

That's not asking much. 

who said you can't doubt or question things?  Bible suggests to always challenge what you know.

Probably why it doesn't happen that way.

i know because I know God.  How would you know?  Good question. 

How could God prove his sovereignty over reality if He's a part of reality?  Are you referring to the physical?  In that case he could do it in many ways.  If you accept anything in scripture, he has shown many times how he can.  Why doesn't He?  see your statement; "your diety very well could...."

Blood was a redemption in scripture.  Blood redeemed through Christ.  Simple as that.   Blood has no importance to you, yet you still die if you lose enough of it. 

I know where you're coming from.  Suicide in general is defined with the "end of life" in mind.  If this was the end of Jesus' life, he wouldn't have come back. 

Either way, you can look at it like a suicide mission.  The reason is because only the blood of the son of God could be sufficient enough to fulfill the law for the world.  

see it this way, one "pure" animal sacrifice was only good enough to cover one person or a very small group. 

Strange then that "educated people" believe and follow Christianity.  As one "educated" person to another.  Can you explain to me the logic behind that?

yea that's it.  Brian has read up on my medical history as well. 

Do you really think before you write? 

A physical consoltation, yes.

Why would them asking the egg and sperm make any difference in the existance of God?

So you're saying you have a memory of "not being asked" before your birth.  Not that the Bible indicates you had a choice to begin with.  Some theories that are extra-Biblical may indicate you do.  Either way, you can't prove or disprove a consoltation for live with any entity before your birth.

It's a very illogical point.

instead, for years and years before, it was well known among followers of the God of Abraham that He was to send his Son as an ultimate sacrifice for mankind... and they knew why it had to be that way!!! 

Stranger yet... Jesus wasn't anyone's "spouse, girlfriend (or boyfriend), or fan"

we serve caviar!

wait... that's not in the Bible!  Are you a cultist?

oh, you work for the government! 

I'm still waiting for you to show me why what I understand to be true is not.  So far, you've done... well.. I guess what would be considered "good enough for government work"

1. I understand that the Father is not the Son but they are both God (as I understand trinitarianism). So you're saying God died but he didn't die because he needed to raise himself from the dead?

2. Why the move up in the sin offering? The sin offering for an entire community was one young bull. Did God just need to kill a more sentient being because the world is a larger community?

3. Back to question 1 - Jesus died and Jesus is God so God died...no wait, God couldn't die because God raised Jesus from the dead. So either Jesus didn't die (because he's God) or God lived and died simulataneously. Of course, if you mean the body that God was inhabiting that people called Jesus, the sacrifice of a body God didn't need and coule recreate at will doesn't seem like a big deal.

This is why I say faith and reason are incompatible. Thinking the Resurrection through makes it unworkable. If it's not bought on faith, it can't be bought (unless you have a diferent way to go about it).

Thanks for your time. Please be patient if your answers raise more questions.

The problem with the "Jesus as scapegoat" idea is this - they didn't kill the scapegoat. They took it outside the town and set it loose. Why would God need to make this particular exception?

As for the death of Jesus the man - that cheapens it a bit doesn't it? As a man, he was nothing special - the specialness came from the divinity. Are you really saying nothing special was sacrificed to save my soul?

As for the book, I work for a university library with multiple branch campuses and have access to his other books. I'm pretty sure I can get my hands on it if a copy comes by.

First of all.  Noticing the dates of when you posted, I am terribly sorry it took me so long to respond.  Life has been quite out of control as of lately. 

Onto the topic.  I am a very patient person. 

The scapegoat was taken outside the town and set loose so that it could wander into the desert and starve to death.  The main idea was that they were never to see it back in that town again.  

More common use of the scapegoat was to send it out behind a herd so that it would attract anything looking to eat the sheep.  When a scapegoat gets scared, it actually can't run and stiffins up.  This way, the wolves or whatever might be after the sheep will eat the goat instead.

Not so because Jesus was the perfect man.  He was completely sinless.  Pure blood of such character was needed for an appropriate sacrifice according to law.  Spiritually he was also forsaken by God and therefore it was more than just the life of the man that was sacrificed at that moment. 

Great news on that book.  I hope you do.  Like I said, it is his latest, therefore, it could be a little bit.  He took some perspectives I never thought of taking before.  We can discuss them when you can get your hands on it.

Only good and whole things are allowed in heaven. 

Caposkia, your last post was a joke.

There's something tiresome about reading all these sensible posts from decent people

attempting to reason with a complete idiot.

Go away, you numbat. You're wasting our precious life.

I be the first to say that Caposkia is full of crap. But if you look at when Cap joined and how long Cap has stuck around it shows promise. And Cap wouldn't be here month after month if something were not sinking in. Not to mention all the mere spectators who are not in as deep that are not sure, will read these posts and see that we are right.

I want Cap here because I like the practice and I do not judge Cap as an individual, merely just the claims made. I don't think you need to treat someone who has been here this long like a newbie trolling. Cap is making the effort, no matter how bad we think the arguments are.

I like Cap. I like people who can take the punches and don't take it personally. Cap will be the first to say that I am the most blasphemous and "in your face" but will never accuse me of hating someone merely because I think they are full of shit. I don't think you give enough credit to Cap, and Cap is not a troll.

Fair call Brian. I have to admit that when I read this stuff it morphs into the decades long argument

I have not yet won. At 800 plus posts over a number of years, Caposkia shows that most christian

of virtues - endurance.

No personal offense intended Caposkia - I mistook you for my brother, Tom.

I keep trying to explain this as have countless other atheists.

We know that George Washington existed, and we know that Washington DC exists, but no sane person would claim that he could fart a full sized Lamborghini out of his ass.

In an age of DNA and Ipods you'd think that this crap would rightfully put in the myth bin where it belongs.

It is nothing more than a psychological placebo in an attempt to escape our own mortality. If we can convince ourselves that their is a super hero that will save us, we can avoid our finite existence. How Christians think they are escaping the same human flaw all other religions have, past and present, is absurd. Super heros don't exist. Allah is a myth, Yahwey is a myth and so too that of the magic of Jesus.

How anyone can willfully believe that a claimed being with no body and no DNA can magically get a girl pregnant is beyond me. If you can swallow that then why not believe that George Washington can fart a full sized Lamborghini out of his ass. BOTH claims to be believed require suspension of skepticism and reason.

It merely amounts to something the person wants to believe because the idea sounds comforting. I'd like to date Lucy Lawless, but I don't delude myself into actually thinking I am.

That would be the hypocrite's way out.

e.g. community service for a shortened sentence or no sentence at all... yea, can't argue there.

1.  You can't remember before birth, therefore you have no evidence to support such a theory that you had "no choice"... unless there's something you're not telling me.

(btw, I'm not arguing either way, just making a 'logic' point)

2. He died for everyone.  If you chose not to accept that, then He really didn't do it for you.  Only for those who accept it. 

...but He didn't actually do it to Himself.  He actually pleaded to not have to go through with it if it wasn't needed. 

It's like someone running in front of a bus to push you out of the way.  They ended up saving your life while losing their own.

I never said I didn't believe it.  I'm not familiar with that story.  The problem with your arguement is it wasn't "zombie reannimation"  Jesus Himself was alive and well.  Yes injuries still there, but proof that it was the same body alive after death. 

Also, it wasn't another person summoning Jesus back to life.  You're way overanalyzing the resurrection and in turn falling way off track.  The simple evidence to followers was that He overcame death and therefore is able to do that for us too. 

Are you saying they're higher than God Almighty?  If so, please provide evidence of that. 

Strangely, I don't think you believe in a God at all yet, which makes that irrelevant at this moment.  Once you can accept the existance of a metaphysical being, then we can go into "why the Christian God?"

None taken.  As Brian said, I don't take offense easily... and won't on here.  Words are words. 

As I've done with Brian and you just now in the other post as well is become intensely sarcastic and blow it off.  I have fun with those posts and laugh about many of them.  I'm always ready for a serious conversation amidst all of it.