what? all i am doing is stating the facts. have you ever wondered why i continue to argue with you even though it is not even necessary anymore, given that you have apparently run out of ammo.
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
I don’t know why you keep debating with me. But I know why I do, I still want you to come to Heaven with me. And I’m not low on ammo, I’ve got a full tank and a refill waiting.
--- “Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“
"And I’m not low on ammo, I’ve got a full tank and a refill waiting”
no your dry, every thing that you throw at me now will either be a repeat or a rehash of what you have said earlier.
“I don’t know why you keep debating with me”
when you first came on you emidety said to every one that they were wrong and that you were right. that, to me is an attack. an attack on me and my friends. something i must retaliate to.
I have have very much become wherry of this ceaseless war, and request a cease fire.
we can agree to disagree, or keep fighting.
I promise you that if you agree i will not bring up religion with you unless you bring it up first.
as well i will reread the bible with more sympathy, and seek out truth in its pages.
if you agree to the sees fire then you must.
look over the bible again as well with a critical eye.
you will also read what others have written about the bible, even if the contradict to what you believe, and you will have an open mind about them.
plese, i seriously have other things i would rather do then argue with you.
the document must be copied and pasted by you with your signicher above the doted line, i will do the same.
...............
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
Anyhow, I really want everyones perspectives here. I am in the middle of writing a nondiscriminating book about religion and I need as many aspects as I can get. We have agnostics, atheists, humanists, Christians. Come one people, debate!! Tell me what you believe and why. I don’t want anyones feelings hurt though. I just want to know what it is that people believe and the reasons behind them.
--- The farther you question, the more they will hate you.
Anything else you would like to hear about Christianity? Just like, anything specific? Because there’s a lot I could say, I could write pages and pages, ooops, that’s what I’ve been doing lately.
--- “Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
“1. Does God exist? Throughout history, in all cultures of the world, people have been convinced there is a God.
Billions of people, who represent diverse sociological, intellectual, emotional, educational makeups...believe that there is a Creator, a God to be worshipped. Now, the fact that so many people believe something certainly doesn’t make it true. But when so many people through the ages are so personally convinced that God exists, can one say with absolute confidence that they are all mistaken?
“Anthropological research has indicated that among the farthest and most remote primitive people today, there is a universal belief in God. And in the earliest histories and legends of people all around the world, the original concept was of one God, who was the Creator. An original high God seems once to have been in their consciousness even in those societies which are today polytheistic.“3
2. Does God exist? The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today.
Many examples showing God’s design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:
The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth’s size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth’s surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.4 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.
The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth’s position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.
And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet it restrains our massive oceans from spilling over across the continents.5
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You’ll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees.
Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that thousands of chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.6
Water is also chemically inert. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.
Ninety-seven percent of the Earth’s water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.7
The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of this article in your hand. Your brain registers emotional responses, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.
The human brain processes more than a million messages a second.8 Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. A brain that deals with more than a million pieces of information every second, while evaluating its importance and allowing you to act on the most pertinent information...can we say mere chance brought about such an astounding organ?
When NASA launches a shuttle mission, it is assumed a monkey didn’t write the plan, but intelligent and knowledgeable minds. How does one explain the existence of the human brain? Only a mind more intelligent and knowledgeable than humanity could have created the human brain.
3. Does God exist? Mere “chance” is not an adequate explanation of creation.
Imagine looking at Mount Rushmore, in which the likenesses of Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt are carved. Could you ever believe that it came about by chance? Given infinite time, wind, rain and chance, it is still hard to believe something like that, tied to history, was randomly formed in the side of a mountain. Common sense tells us that people planned and skillfully carved those figures.
This article only touches on a few amazing aspects of our world: the Earth’s position to the sun, some properties of water, one organ in the human body. Could any of these have come about by chance?
The distinguished astronomer Sir Frederick Hoyle showed how amino acids randomly coming together in a human cell is mathematically absurd. Sir Hoyle illustrated the weakness of “chance” with the following analogy. “What are the chances that a tornado might blow through a junkyard containing all the parts of a 747, accidentally assemble them into a plane, and leave it ready for take-off? The possibilities are so small as to be negligible even if a tornado were to blow through enough junkyards to fill the whole universe!“9
When one considers the intricacies of our life and universe, it is reasonable to think that an intelligent, loving Creator provided for everything we need for life. The Bible describes God as the author and sustainer of life.
4. Does God exist? Humankind’s inherent sense of right and wrong cannot be biologically explained.
There arises in all of us, of any culture, universal feelings of right and wrong. Even a thief gets upset and feels wronged when someone steals from him. If someone violently grabs a child from a family and rapes that child, there is an anger and revulsion and a rage to confront that act as evil, regardless of the culture. Where did we get this sense of wrongness? How do we explain a universal law in the conscience of all people that says murder for fun is wrong?
And in areas like courage, dying for a cause, love, dignity, duty and compassion, where did these come from? If people are merely products of physical evolution, “survival of the fittest," why do we sacrifice for each other? Where did we get this inner sense of right and wrong? Our conscience can best be explained by a loving Creator who cares about the decisions and harmony of humanity.
5. Does God exist? God not only has revealed Himself in what can be observed in nature, and in human life, but He has even more specifically shown Himself in the Bible.
God’s thoughts, personality, and attitudes can only be known if God chooses to reveal them. All else would be human speculation. We are at a loss if God does not wish to be known. But God wants us to know Him and has told us in the Bible all we need to know about His character and how to relate to Him. This makes the reliability of the Bible an important consideration.
Archaeological findings continue to confirm rather than refute the accuracy of the Bible. For example, an archeological find in northern Israel in August 1993 confirmed the existence of King David, author of many of the Psalms in the Bible.10 The Dead Sea Scrolls and other archaeological discoveries continue to substantiate the historical accuracy of the Bible.
The Bible was written over a 1500-year span, by 40 different authors, in different locations and on separate continents, written in three different languages, covering diverse subject matters at different points in history.11 Yet there is an astounding consistency in its message. Throughout the entire Bible the same message appears:
God created the world we live in, and created us specifically to have a relationship with Him.
He deeply loves us.
We have sinned and are under God’s judgment, in need of His forgiveness.
God provided a way for our sins to be forgiven.
He asks us to receive His forgiveness and have a relationship with Him that will last eternally.
Along with this central script, the Bible specifically reveals God’s character. Psalm 145 is a typical summary of God’s personality, thoughts and feelings toward us. If you want to know God, here He is.
6. Does God exist? Unlike any other revelation of God, Jesus Christ is the clearest, most specific picture of God.
Why Jesus? Look throughout the major world religions and you’ll find that Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius and Moses all identified themselves as teachers or prophets. None of them ever claimed to be equal to God. Surprisingly, Jesus did. That is what sets Jesus apart from all the others. He said God exists and you’re looking at Him. Though He talked about His Father in heaven, it was not from the position of separation, but of very close union, unique to all humankind. Jesus said that anyone who had seen Him had seen the Father, anyone who believed in Him, believed in the Father.
He said, “I am the light of the world, he who follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.“12 He claimed attributes belonging only to God: to be able to forgive people of their sin, free them from habits of sin, give people a more abundant life and give them eternal life in heaven. Unlike other teachers who focused people on their words, Jesus pointed people to himself. He did not say, “follow my words and you will find truth." He said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father but through me.“13
What proof did Jesus give for claiming to be divine? He did what people can’t do. Jesus performed miracles. He healed people...blind, crippled, deaf, even raised a couple of people from the dead. He had power over objects...created food out of thin air, enough to feed crowds of several thousand people. He performed miracles over nature...walked on top of a lake, commanding a raging storm to stop for some friends. People everywhere followed Jesus, because He constantly met their needs, doing the miraculous. He said if you do not want to believe what I’m telling you, you should at least believe in me based on the miracles you’re seeing.14
What did Jesus reveal about God’s personality? What about God’s thoughts, expectations and His feelings toward humankind? Jesus Christ showed God to be gentle, loving, aware of our self-centeredness and shortcomings, yet deeply wanting a relationship with us. Jesus revealed that although God views us as sinners, worthy of His punishment, His love for us ruled and God came up with a different plan. God would have His Son receive the punishment for our sin. And Jesus willingly accepted this plan.
Jesus was tortured with a whip of nine sharp-tipped ends. A “crown” of two-inch thorns was pressed into his head. Then they secured Him to a cross by pounding nails through His hands and feet into the wood. Given His other miracles, those nails didn’t keep Him on the cross; His love for us did. Jesus died in our place so we could be forgiven. Of all the religions known to humanity, only through Jesus will you see God reaching toward humanity, providing a way for us to have a relationship with Him. Jesus proves a divine heart of love, meeting our needs, drawing us to Himself. Because of Jesus' death we can be forgiven, fully accepted by God and genuinely loved by God. God says, “I have loved you with an everlasting love, therefore I have continued my faithfulness to you.“15 This is God, in action.
The most conclusive proof that Jesus is equal to God was Jesus' most closely scrutinized miracle - His own resurrection from the dead. Jesus said that three days after His burial He would come back to life. On the third day after His crucifixion, the almost two-ton boulder in front of His tomb was catapulted up a slope.16 The guard of well-trained Roman soldiers saw a blinding light and an angel. The tomb was empty, except for the burial clothes that had been wrapped around Jesus' body. Over the years, legal, historical and logical analysis has been applied to Jesus' resurrection and the most feasible conclusion still is that Jesus rose from the dead.
Does God exist? If you want to know, investigate Jesus Christ. We’re told that “God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.“17
Do you want to begin a relationship with God and actually know you are accepted by Him?
This is your decision, no coercion here. But if you want to be forgiven by God and come into a relationship with Him, you can do so right now by asking Him to forgive you and come into your life. Jesus said, “Behold, I stand at the door [of your heart] and knock. He who hears my voice and opens the door, I will come into him [or her].“18 If you want to do this, but aren’t sure how to put it into words, this may help: “Jesus, thank you for dying for my sins. You know my life and that I need to be forgiven. I ask you to forgive me right now and come into my life. Thank you that you want a relationship with me. Amen."
God views your relationship with Him as permanent. Referring to all those who believe in Him, Jesus Christ said of us, “I know them, and they follow me; and I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand.“19
So, does God exist? Looking at all these facts, one can conclude that a loving God does exist and can be known in an intimate, personal way. If you need more information about Jesus' claim to divinity, or about God’s existence, or if you have similar important questions, please email us."
http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html
*Proof that the Bible is real:
“A Major Proof of the Bible
By Ernest L. Martin Ph.D., 1975
Edited by David Sielaff, May 2002
Is the Holy Bible the Word of God? All of us need to know. A person’s very salvation can depend upon it.
Numerous books have been written supposedly to prove its validity. Some try to demonstrate it through prophecy, others through doctrine, and still others resort to pure emotionalism. Emotionalism is weak evidence. But while the other factors can help demonstrate the Bible’s credibility, there is one major proof that predominates over all others. It is the witness of Christ himself. If Christ can be proved, that is, if proof can be shown that he was who he said he was, that will go a long way in proving the Bible itself. Let us look at this important proof.
Are the Gospels Truthful?
We wish to stress the importance of Christ’s witness in the matter of the Old and New Testament canon. The central proof of the Bible is Christ. How do we know that the Christ of the Gospels is divine—that he is actually the Son of the Living God, and especially that he was resurrected from the dead?
If the Gospels are reliable, then no further proof should be needed. But are the Gospels and their witness true? Frankly, they need to be put to the test. There is nothing irreverent in this at all (1 Thessalonians 5:21). We need to apply to them the same basic rules to which scholars subject all other literature in order to prove its reliability.
There are four major rules for proving the credibility of documents. One, was the writer of the document an eyewitness to the events he records or was he at least a contemporary that lived in the same area of the events? Two, were there other independent witnesses to corroborate the evidence? Three, did those witnesses continue to maintain their testimonies until death—even to the jeopardy of their lives? Four, were there also hostile witnesses who would have reason not to believe the evidence but still say the events occurred? If all of these four factors are in solid evidence, then reliability becomes very acceptable. With the New Testament documents, we have all four evidences in a firm position for credibility.
Let us apply the first rule that the author must have been an eyewitness to the events.
The Gospel of Matthew, for example, was composed not much longer than a generation after the death of Christ, at a time when hundreds, if not thousands, of witnesses to the crucifixion and resurrection were still alive. Matthew himself had lived through the events he describes. That is contemporaneity. And it guarantees to us reliable testimony. Let us see why.
Suppose a writer in the Year 1970 wrote that a major prophet less than forty years before had gone throughout New York State, working so many miracles that thousands followed him from place to place; and that in Times Square, on July 4, 1935, when huge crowds of people were present, that same prophet had been executed at the behest of the government and the people of New York.
If such a thing had happened back in 1935, there would still be many thousands of witnesses alive to attest to it.
But on the other hand, if such an event never happened, could any living historian, writer, or journalist invent such a fallacious story, send it to the people of New York City, tell them to depend on its veracity with their lives, and persuade them to believe it? Of course not!
But Matthew did not have to fabricate the life of Christ. According to ancient testimony, he wrote out his account and sent it to the people of Judea—the very people who had witnessed Christ’s activities—within forty years of His crucifixion. If these things really did not happen as Matthew said, then Matthew and the other Gospel writers were leaving themselves open to real and dangerous criticism.
The Jews of Judea, of all peoples, would have known whether thousands had followed Jesus around the country. They knew whether or not the people of Jerusalem had used pressure upon the Roman authorities to crucify Him. Yet many of them—especially those in Jerusalem—came to believe the Christian message. They even became willing to give their lives for its truth. This fact alone is strong critical reason for accepting Matthew’s Gospel as relating substantial truth.
Other Testimonies
The second rule involves the having of independent witnesses to corroborate the evidence of an author.
The execution of Jesus Christ was not done in a corner with just a few witnesses around to testify to it. On the contrary, Josephus tells us that at least two million people used to gather every year around Jerusalem at the Passover season (the time when Christ’s crucifixion took place) (Wars, 6. 9. 3).
The more people there were to witness the event the more difficult it would become to invent and falsify matters. Christ’s death and his subsequent rejection by his own disciples became a well-known matter. The fact of many witnesses is a substantial safeguard to the veracity of the written records.
Now notice the importance of this. Not only was Matthew’s Gospel written when many thousands who could witness to its truth were still alive, but nearly twenty one other New Testament books were composed before 68 C.E.—within thirty-seven years of Christ’s death. Our World War I ended just over fifty years ago, yet thousands upon thousands of witnesses are still alive to testify to that holocaust. In 68 C.E. there would have been thousands of persons still living who had witnessed those earlier events in Jerusalem at the time of Christ.
Actually, with twenty-one of the New Testament books written within 37 years of Christ’s activities, we can call all these books contemporary records. These documents were written when there were still many witnesses to the events.
The Witness of the Apostles
The third rule concerns continued belief—even until death. Could any believe that the Gospel writers were consistently lying (a vice which they utterly condemned), yet they were remarkably willing to give up their lives for the “lies” which they were propagating? It might be imagined that one or two might lie (I am speaking humanly), but that every one of the apostles plus hundreds of others were liars is untenable.
It is related in the Gospel of Mark—a Gospel which was inspired by Peter’s preaching—as can be demonstrated—that Peter and all the apostles fled as cowards from the crucifixion scene. They did not remain anywhere in the vicinity of the Jewish and Roman authorities. And while we may doubt that they rejoiced to record their own cowardly display, this defection and flight of Christ’s key men was not a hidden matter. Let us see how their defection becomes an amazing testimony to the truth of Christ’s resurrection three days later.
The Law commanded the whole Jewish nation to celebrate three seasons with great solemnity: Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. Almost invariably, the same people who journeyed to Jerusalem at Passover would be back there for the next festival. Therefore, Christ had directed his apostles to wait in Jerusalem until the Feast of Pentecost. One reason was to have the same Passover crowd who earlier had been present at the crucifixion back in Jerusalem fifty days later.
This time, those multitudes were to witness something different. They were no longer to witness a cowardly flight of Christ’s disciples. This time the people in Jerusalem would observe a display of such power and conviction by those once-afraid disciples, that nothing could humanly account for it.
These disciples, who had been terrified of that same crowd just fifty days earlier, now stood in the midst of them, each man witnessing with assurance and dynamic conviction to Christ’s resurrection. None was fearful for his own personal life.
The Book of Acts makes this plain. And, should there be someone who would question the reliability of this document, it should be noted that the Book of Acts was written within forty years after the first Pentecost—an event which took place in the midst of thousands of people in Jerusalem. The Book of Acts, in regard to literary criticism, is a contemporary document—written at a time when thousands of witnesses were still alive. There can be no doubt that Luke’s record in Acts is definitely reliable.
What needs to be noticed is the change of attitude in Christ’s apostles in those fifty short days. These men no longer feared the Romans. They no longer feared the Jews. They no longer doubted Christ’s mission, nor the fact of his resurrection. All eleven of the original apostles were consistent in their teaching. Is it possible to believe that they were all lying? The understanding of basic human psychology suffices against our believing that eleven individual men could one after another deceptively tell a crowd they once feared that Christ was now alive from the dead. They were jeopardizing their lives before that crowd by preaching Christ’s resurrection.
The Church Begins
Historians agree that the Christian church began on that Pentecost Day in the First Century. It is also well known that the Christian message began to be preached not long afterward around the world. The growth of the Christian church gained strong momentum by the end of the First Century. Thousands upon thousands from all nationalities were beginning to accept the central truth of Christianity—the fact of the resurrection of Christ.
This rapid spread of belief in Christ’s resurrection can only be accounted for by the astounding enthusiasm that must have been manifested by the first propagators. Are we to imagine that the Christian message could have grown so quickly if the original witnesses to the resurrection showed no emotion nor real conviction in the matter?
Peter continued to live for at least thirty-five years after the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, and so did many of the other apostles. Could the message have grown without all the apostles’ continued conviction in that resurrection? Of course not. One thing must be admitted if nothing else: the people were convinced that the apostles were convinced.
Paul tells us that not only were the original eleven apostles witnesses that Christ was resurrected, but also over five hundred others saw him as well (1 Corinthians 15:6). Paul put out the challenge to people in 55 C.E. to go to Jerusalem and look up some of those five hundred for themselves. Even after a period for reflection of twenty-four years (in 55 C.E.) there were many in Jerusalem who still believed that Christ rose from the dead. If what Paul wrote was a lie, then he was leaving himself wide open to censure.
The Apostle Paul
The fourth rule for reliability concerns hostile witnesses. Did those who wished not to believe the evidence—even though they were there when it happened—still admit that it was a fact? Paul, among others, was such a witness. What was his belief concerning Christ’s resurrection?
Paul himself figures very prominently in proving the fact of Christ’s resurrection. Since all scholars are prepared to accept at least ten of Paul’s Epistles to be genuine, let us bring him forth as a witness. The rules of literary criticism show him to be reliable, for Paul wrote at a time when many of his statements could easily have been checked for their accuracy and truth.
Now look at Paul. He was a chief, if not the chief, antagonist of the Church in its very beginnings. The High Priest (the top ecclesiastical man in the Judaic nation) had personally given Paul the responsibility for exterminating the Christian church. And Paul went about his task, according to his own words, with fanatic zeal. He could appropriately be called the Adolf Eichmann of his day in his effort to overthrow the Church.
In that first period, before Paul’s conversion, there was no one more convinced of the non-resurrection of Christ than he. No one was more determined to disprove it. Paul also had many of the elders in the Jewish nation behind him. All of them had “theological” arguments against Christ’s resurrection. The practical and logical evidences did not shake their “theological” minds.
At first, Paul was vehemently against the practical evidence. His mind was closed to any acceptance of it. He must have used every intellectual argument to dispute the possibility of the resurrection which thousands of humble, practical-minded Christians were accepting.
Yet, what was the final belief of Paul? This is where he becomes a vital witness to the truth of the resurrection miracle and the divinity of Christ.
Paul, according to his own later testimony, while on the road to Damascus with authority from the High Priest to apprehend Christians, had his mind changed. It was a miracle that did it, but in a single day, this man of lofty intellect came to believe the practical evidence. And when the practical side became evident, his well-trained mind finally came to accept the abundant “intellectual” proofs found in the Old Testament.
From that day forward, Paul never turned back. Until the day he was executed for his beliefs, he steadfastly maintained his faith in Christ and the reality of Christ’s resurrection. Although it took a miracle to open his eyes, Paul finally became its chief exponent and propagator.
With Paul’s uncompromising acceptance, the proof of the resurrection becomes overwhelming. Here was a man who understood Judaic theology thoroughly. And not only was he trained in Judaism, but being born and reared in Tarsus of Asia Minor, the center of Stoic philosophy, he was well acquainted with the classical works of Gentiles. With the world’s knowledge in his mind—and most of it would have been very critical knowledge—he would have been one of the most unlikely persons to accept the resurrection of Christ. Yet he did accept the practical and intellectual proofs of this greatest of miracles.
He became so fervent in this belief that it was said he “turned the world upside down” (Acts 17:6). Everyone who came in contact with Paul was certainly assured that he was convinced of this major proof of Christianity. Because of Paul’s firm conviction and that of the other apostles, the Roman world became convinced of the legitimacy of Christ’s resurrection in a short three hundred years.
Surely, all this provable history demonstrates that the evidence unanimously supports the fact of Christ’s resurrection. No wonder Christ gave the resurrection sign as a major sign to the world that He was the Messiah. This is the one event that is so provable, by all human standards, that it takes little faith to believe it.
What This Means Towards Proving the Bible
The foregoing evidence of Christ’s resurrection proves that Christ must have been representative of a power that we can only call the God of the Universe. He must have been divine. Once forced to that conclusion, we are also constrained, by sheer reason, to accept the validity of Christ’s statements.
Thus, when Christ defined for us that the Old Testament was composed of the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms (Luke 24:44), His definition must be accepted. This is the exact division of the Old Testament that the Jews today accept as their official Scriptures. This means the Book of Esther (which many want to reject today) must be an inspired work because it occurs inside that Tripartite Division sanctioned by Christ. Esther is as inspired as Genesis or Isaiah.
Once Christ has been proved, then Joshua’s long day, the opening of the Red Sea and the creation of man must all be reckoned as having actually occurred. All of these events are in the Old Testament canon that Christ said was “the Scriptures” in Luke 24:45. All the books of that canon must be acknowledged as truthful once Christ has been proved.
Also, the twenty-seven books of the New Testament which witness to the truth of Christ’s resurrection must be acknowledged as containing essential truths.
The evidence of Christ and his divinity is not the only proof of the Bible, but it is the essential part."
Ernest L. Martin
http://askelm.com/doctrine/d740101.htm
*Proof of Creation from a physics view:
Author: James R Leclair ( — -.city.barrie.on.ca)
Date: 11-16-05 13:28
“The proof of Creation has been written into the very foundations of every religion, stored within the biblical metaphors.
100 years was used as an important age within the lives of many religious figures in all the oldest religions.
The number 36525 (100 years of earth rotations) was also used to represent the pages of wisdom of various figures such as Buddha, or the number of leagues Mercury ran to measure the world etc etc
The Cube is represented in every major religion. Muslim:black cube of mecca.
Greekrahma, also the world was represented as a cube to the greeks.
Christianity: ark of the covenant, and the cross is a cube unravelled.
Judaism: Holy of holies the room god dwells in, the cube on it’s corner is a Dreidel, also a diamond, spin it and it looks like a star of david. etc etc
In Euclid theory (the Theory of observation) a cube has 6 sides 8 corners and 12 lines of dimension creating it, when reduced to a fraction, 0.6812, and multipleid by the number of rotations of the earth in 100 years (365.25 days times 100) 36,525 equals 24,881.
24,881 is the approximate circumferance of the earth in miles. it is off by no more than 1500 miles
Pluto takes 248.8 years to go around the sun once .. %1 the calculated circumferance of earth
Mars takes 687 days to orbit the sun once. earth takes 365.25 days (now 365.242 due to the slowing down of the solar system). divide 687 by 365.25 and you get .53
earth’s circumferance is approx. 24881, mars is 13264, divide the two and you get .53
I don’t have all the numbers at hand, but every planet is a circumferance OR diameter OR orbital pattern OR distance from the sun OR from each other etc etc etc according to numbers unique to the Cube and the Earth.
etc etc
the cube times the earths rotation = earth
Einstein searched his entire life for mathematical “proof” of creation. The G.U.T. Grand Unification Theory, scientific proof of God
how can the third planet in a solar system dictate the variables of every other planet in it’s system? how, unless the location of everything was predetermined according to numbers unique to the earth.
Read this, study it, understand it or refute it.. But tell people about it and post it everywhere."
--- “Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“
Last edited 09 Feb 2006 11:02 pm by Someone who cares....
1. People are convinced there is a god because they have no where else to concentrate their beliefs and they need to find a place to turn to.
2. The complexity of our planet has been described by science and is easily a much easier thing to believe than god made us.
3. Mere chance is indeed not an adequate explanation. According to the agnostic belief. (My belief.) We are incapable of comprehending what created everything.
4.Right and wrong is subjective. Remember? Everyone has their own opinions and it can be explained, it’s called adaptation.
5.Bullshit, he’s never shown himself. If he has, then I haven’t seen him. And believe me I’ve tried.
6. This has nothing to do with whether or not god is real. Only someone telling people that he is.
--- The farther you question, the more they will hate you.
Also the reason you can relate so many religions with eathother is.
A: Many religions are a derivative of something else. Christianity-mormonism.
B:Humans are only capable of understanding a certain amount of things. In other words, we wouldn’t be able to fathom anything more than what we have now until we’ve adapted to.
C:It’s like the Coke vs Pepsi thing. If someone elses religion makes sense, let’s make sure ours does too.
--- The farther you question, the more they will hate you.
"Bullshit, he’s never shown himself. If he has, then I haven’t seen him. And believe me I’ve tried."
Tell me, how did you try? Did you really believe in Him with all your heart and soul? Because if you don’t believe in God, He’s not going to show himself to you. And were you trying by the wrong methods?
“According to the agnostic belief. (My belief.) We are incapable of comprehending what created everything."
So you just walk around and wonder your whole life about what or who created everything? It’s against human nature, we humans have a tendency to want an answer for everything. And God holds all the answers. It’s all about Him. Why don’t you just try to believe that God created the world, is it that hard? And certainly believing in God explains more that humans from bacteria, monkeys, and rocks... LOL. I don’t know how you guys can believe you came from rocks! And I can’t believe you guys believe you are all mistakes (big bang = mistake). And I can’t believe you guys think you are all animals. It’s all confusing. God has the answers, and I’m resting in them right now... Ahh... The joy and peace and relaxation believing in God, I must have a better life that most of you guys, who are breaking their heads over finding the missing link fossils that don’t even exist!
This is an article on how Evolutionists have admitted thier own silliness (I don’t want to use any bad words) of what they believed:
Evolutionists often have come forth and admitted their own and their colleagues' extreme degree of bias in this matter. Some have admitted that their approach has not been scientific or objective at all. Many admit to the severe lack of evidence for evolution and that they have accepted their conclutions only because they are unwilling to accept that evolution never occured. (And other final considerations.)
“Paleontologists seem to have thought it their duty to protect the rest of us from the erroneous conclusions we might have drawn if we had known the actual state of the evidence." ([11], p.59)
“We (evolutionists) have been telling our students for years not to accept any statement on its face value but to examine the evidence, and, therefore, it is rather a shock to discover that we have failed to follow our own sound advice." John T, Bonner ([19], p.91)
“We Paleontologists have said that the history of life supports (the story of gradual adaptive change), all the while really knowing that it does not." Miles Eldredge, pro-evolution ([11], p.59)
"...the philosophy of evolution is based upon assumptions that cannot be scientifically verified...whatever evidence can be assembled for evolution is both limited and circumstantial in nature." G.A. Kerkut, pro-evolution ([4], p.363)
"(the record of reckless speculation of human origins) is so astonishing that it is legitimate to ask whether much science is yet to be found in this field at all." Solly Zuckerman ([11], p.82)
“In other words, while Osborn, Gregory, and their colleagues considered themselves to have written scientific analysis of human evolution, they had in fact been telling stories (fiction). Scientific stories to be sure, but stories nonetheless." Misia Landau, paraphrase ([14], p.32)
“The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone." T.L. Moor, pro-evolution ([22], p.22)
“We cannot disprove that it (the universe) was created in 4004 B.C...." George Simpson, pro-evolution
"...objective examination has rarely been the object of Darwinist paleontology. The Darwinist approach has consistently been to find some supporting fossil evidence, claim it as `proof' for `evolution', and then ignore all the difficulties." ([11], p.84)
“It is, in fact, a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictate conclusions." “Data are just as often molded to fit preferred conclusions." Roger Lewin, pro-evolutionist ([14], p.68)
“I have come to believe that many statements we make about the how and whys of human evolution say as much about us, the paleoanthropologists and the larger society in which we live, as about anything that really happened." David Pilbeam, pro-evolution ([14], p.85)
“We do not see things the way they are; we see them the way we are." David Pilbeam, pro-evolution ([5], p.?)
"...in my own subject of paleoanthropology, `theory' heavily influenced by implicit ideas (assumptions) almost always dominates `data'...Ideas that are totally unrelated to actual fossils have dominated theory building, which in turn strongly influences the way fossils are interpreted." David Pilbeam, pro-evolution ([14], p.127)
“Racism, as we would characterize it today, was explicit in the writings of virtually all the major anthropologists of the first century, simply because it was the generally accepted view." ([14], p.307)
We must note then that when Darwin wrote his paper, Origin of Species, he had no skulls, his contemporaries were filled with racism as they tried to find the less than humans, and his Co-founder, Wallace, decided against the theory.
“The problem is that because we know the `end of the story' (that evolution is true), we tend to interpret earlier events as if their sole purpose was to reach that end." Roger Lewin, pro-evolution ([15], p.22)
“Evolution itself is accepted by zoologists, not because it has been observed to occur or can be proved by logical coherent evidence, but because the only alternative — special creation — is clearly incredible." D.M.S. Watson ([22], p.22)
“Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation which is unthinkable." Arthur Keith ([22], p.22)
"...there is an important difference between going to the empirical evidence to test a doubtful theory against some plausible alternative, and going to the evidence to look for confirmation of the only theory that one is willing to tolerate." ([11], p.28)
“This situation, where men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science." W.R.Thompson, pro-evolution, in his introduction to Origin of Species by Darwin. ([19], p.90)
"...with human origins, each generations explanation appears to contain expository themes that go well beyond what might be implied by the new scientific information of the time." ([11], p.312) "...ideas about human origins turn out on closer examination to tell us as much about the present as about the past, as much about our own experiences as about those of our remote ancestors." Evolutionist John Durant ([11], p.312)
"...the only reason why most people seem to believe in evolution is either because they want to believe in it or else because they have been cowed into accepting it out of fear of being called ignorant or reactionary or some such fearful name." ([19], p.92)
“The incessant repetition of this unproved claim glossing lightly over the difficulties, and the assumption of an arrogant attitude toward those who are not easily swayed by fashions of science, are considered to afford scientific proof of the doctrine." Richard Goldschmidt, geneticist. ([24], p.21)
“The charge of circular reasoning which has been lodged against the critically important paleontological evidence of evolution is not simply to be laughed off or ignored as evolutionists too commonly attempt to do. It quite plainly involves the presupposition of evolution, with numerous involved deductions based on that premise. It is not, therefore, valid to offer this presupposition and these deductions as proof of evolution, and especially in view of the tremendously important fact that there is no real evidence of present evolution." ([19], p.55)
The supposed division of the continents, Africa and South America, cannot be considered as having happened since the earth’s land cannot be reconstructed to truly fit together in any orderly way. “Recent investigators have used computers to try to fit the continents. But even one of the reconstructions of how Africa, South America, Europe, and North America once fitted together has areas of overlap between these continents, and Central America is omitted altogether." ([7], p.)
One must realize that a resemblance of a near fit does not make two things to have been together once in the past. Such would be a logical fallacy.
There were once considered to be 180 vestigial organs (organs of no use that evolutionists use to say we evolved out of). Today, there are medically regarded as being no vestigial organs. For example, the appendix is noted as able to fight infection in early life and tonsils destroy harmful bacteria. ([4], p.112)
It was once thought that `...an organism was assumed to pass through the stages of its evolutionary history during its development as an embryo." "(This) has been thoroughly discredited by scientists today." ([4], p.354 4)
What as thought to be `gill slits' is actually the formation of the middle ear canal, jaw, and parts of the head and neck. ([22], p.23). The coccyx, once regarded as a literal tail bone, is now known to be a muscle attachment in the embryo and as providing support to the pelvic region in the fully developed bodies.
Darwin: “I have asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a fantasy." “I...am ready to cry with vexation at my blindness and presumption." ([23], p.59)
DARWIN HERE (UP)
“And when we examine the respective evidences still more closely...we shall find that there are almost insuperable difficulties with the evolutionary explanation of each of the different evidences. They can all be understood much better in terms of special creation than in terms of evolution." ([18], p.19)
“If there are so many problems with Darwinism and no satisfactory alternative within the framework of evolution, why not reevaluate the framework?" ([11], p.62)
“Why not consider the possibility that life is what it so evidently seems to be, the product of creative intelligence? Science would not come to an end, because the task would remain of deciphering the languages in which genetic information is communicated, and in general finding out how the whole system works. What scientists would lose is not an inspiring research program, but the illusion of total mastery of nature. They would have to face the possibility that beyond the natural world there is a further reality which transcends science." ([11], p.110)
--- “Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“
"Many examples showing God’s design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:
The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth’s size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth’s surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.4 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life."
could be that, it also could be that life evolved to take advantage to the conditions that are around it.
“The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth’s position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.
And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet it restrains our massive oceans from spilling over across the continents.5
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You’ll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees.
Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that thousands of chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.6
Water is also chemically inert. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter."
once again, could be that, it also could be that life evolved to take advantage to the conditions that are around it.
what this article false to realize is that the planet forms, then life evolves, not the other way around.
“How do we explain a universal law in the conscience of all people that says murder for fun is wrong? "
life favors survival idiot. if a species just went around killing its self there would be no individuals to reproduce. I’m a Weasel and even i know that!
“The Gospel of Matthew, for example, was composed not much longer than a generation after the death of Christ, at a time when hundreds, if not thousands, of witnesses to the crucifixion and resurrection were still alive. Matthew himself had lived through the events he describes. That is contemporaneity. And it guarantees to us reliable testimony. Let us see why."
lets also not forget that Matthew was a follower of Christ and there for not reliable.
Why is he not reliable?
because he was a follower of Christ, he would want to spread his beliefs to all people, nothing would be past him, including falsfing a document.
“Suppose a writer in the Year 1970 wrote that a major prophet less than forty years before had gone throughout New York State, working so many miracles that thousands followed him from place to place; and that in Times Square, on July 4, 1935, when huge crowds of people were present, that same prophet had been executed at the behest of the government and the people of New York.
If such a thing had happened back in 1935, there would still be many thousands of witnesses alive to attest to it.
But on the other hand, if such an event never happened, could any living historian, writer, or journalist invent such a fallacious story, send it to the people of New York City, tell them to depend on its veracity with their lives, and persuade them to believe it? Of course not!"
if that had happened then he would not need to have written about it, there would be newspaper articles.
“And certainly believing in God explains more that humans from bacteria, monkeys, and rocks... LOL. I don’t know how you guys can believe you came from rocks!"
ya, because coming from a clay and a spare rib is SSSSSSSSOOOOOOOO much more believable.
“But Matthew did not have to fabricate the life of Christ. According to ancient testimony, he wrote out his account and sent it to the people of Judea—the very people who had witnessed Christ’s activities—within forty years of His crucifixion. If these things really did not happen as Matthew said, then Matthew and the other Gospel writers were leaving themselves open to real and dangerous criticism.
The Jews of Judea, of all peoples, would have known whether thousands had followed Jesus around the country. They knew whether or not the people of Jerusalem had used pressure upon the Roman authorities to crucify Him. Yet many of them—especially those in Jerusalem—came to believe the Christian message. They even became willing to give their lives for its truth. This fact alone is strong critical reason for accepting Matthew’s Gospel as relating substantial truth."
this is not taking into account that most people are stupid and believe in every thing they are told.
it is also not mentioning that ancient people were easily fold.
if Christ had come back today, he would be viewed as a street magician, and a liberal hippy.
“Other Testimonies
The second rule involves the having of independent witnesses to corroborate the evidence of an author.
The execution of Jesus Christ was not done in a corner with just a few witnesses around to testify to it. On the contrary, Josephus tells us that at least two million people used to gather every year around Jerusalem at the Passover season (the time when Christ’s crucifixion took place) (Wars, 6. 9. 3).
The more people there were to witness the event the more difficult it would become to invent and falsify matters. Christ’s death and his subsequent rejection by his own disciples became a well-known matter. The fact of many witnesses is a substantial safeguard to the veracity of the written records.
Now notice the importance of this. Not only was Matthew’s Gospel written when many thousands who could witness to its truth were still alive, but nearly twenty one other New Testament books were composed before 68 C.E.—within thirty-seven years of Christ’s death. Our World War I ended just over fifty years ago, yet thousands upon thousands of witnesses are still alive to testify to that holocaust. In 68 C.E. there would have been thousands of persons still living who had witnessed those earlier events in Jerusalem at the time of Christ.
Actually, with twenty-one of the New Testament books written within 37 years of Christ’s activities, we can call all these books contemporary records. These documents were written when there were still many witnesses to the events."
this part actually made me laphe, it doesnt prove anything, all it dose is put forth meaningless statements without any justification.
in the modern age we call this “filibustering”
“The Witness of the Apostles
The third rule concerns continued belief—even until death. Could any believe that the Gospel writers were consistently lying (a vice which they utterly condemned), yet they were remarkably willing to give up their lives for the “lies” which they were propagating? It might be imagined that one or two might lie (I am speaking humanly), but that every one of the apostles plus hundreds of others were liars is untenable."
to them it wouldn’t be lieing, it would be truth in there eyes, besides many other religions propagate the same thing. Islam dose it, Buddhism dose it, many native american religions do it, infect all other religions have done the same thing.
“The Apostle Paul
The fourth rule for reliability concerns hostile witnesses. Did those who wished not to believe the evidence—even though they were there when it happened—still admit that it was a fact? Paul, among others, was such a witness. What was his belief concerning Christ’s resurrection?"
cool.... one person, all you need now is, maby....... oh i don’t know about 34, 67 more.
“The Cube is represented in every major religion. Muslim:black cube of mecca.
Greekrahma, also the world was represented as a cube to the greeks.
Christianity: ark of the covenant, and the cross is a cube unravelled.
Judaism: Holy of holies the room god dwells in, the cube on it’s corner is a Dreidel, also a diamond, spin it and it looks like a star of david. etc etc "
well what do you know! you have just done your self in again! if those religions have it (religions much older the judaism) then really there’s nothing stopping juddaism from copping
it.
“I don’t have all the numbers at hand, but every planet is a circumferance OR diameter OR orbital pattern OR distance from the sun OR from each other etc etc etc according to numbers unique to the Cube and the Earth.
etc etc
the cube times the earths rotation = earth "
completed, meaningless mathematical formulas proving once and for all that you are full of shit.
relay if you cannot even give an answer that you understand your self, don’t post it because i will rip it apart.
“Darwin: “I have asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a fantasy." “I...am ready to cry with vexation at my blindness and presumption." ([23], p.59)"
you keep posting this even though i have already answered it. thus proving that you don’t read my posts in any grate detail.
but here it is again
The story of Darwin’s recanting is not true. Shortly after Darwin’s death, Lady Hope told a gathering that she had visited Darwin on his deathbed and that he had expressed regret over evolution and had accepted Christ. However, Darwin’s daughter Henrietta, who was with him during his last days, said Lady Hope never visited during any of Darwin’s illnesses, that Darwin probably never saw her at any time, and that he never recanted any of his scientific views (Clark 1984, 199; Yates 1994).
The story would be irrelevant even if true. The theory of evolution rests upon reams of evidence from many different sources, not upon the authority of any person or persons.
now as for your last post.
i have one answer
its not my fault you ran out of evidence and was forced to misquote all those people
plese in the futcher try to give something Fourth then mountains of crap... pretty plese!
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
»
Off-Topic
» Religious Debates
rahma, also the world was represented as a cube to the greeks.
