Do You Believe Jesus Christ Rose From The Dead? (Poll)

That what is a bad thing either way?Funky_Llama

The act discussed in Leviticus 18:22.
In Spanish, it's lying.
In English, it's homosexuality.
Either way, it's a sin, according to the Bible. scorch-62

And I'm still waiting on an answer to this:

[QUOTE="dog64"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

This would require a rational explanation for why the Apostles and early Christians would willingly endure persecution and death for something they knew was a lie? The Apostles and early Christians were stoned, beheaded, boiled in oil, imprisoned, crucified, scourged, fed to lions, clothed in animal skins and then torn apart by wild beasts, tarred and lit on fire, disemboweled, burnt at the stake, etc., rather than recant their faith.

dog64

I find it odd that you repeat this. Christianity isn't the only religion that is persecuted. Many religions worldwide are persecuted. Some religions are banned in some countries, and those religious members have to sneak their ways to have religious gatherings. Even today there are people that are being killed for their religious beliefs, and not just Christians. You also can't forget in past history, where many Jews were tortured and killed under Hitler So, just because people are willing to die for their faith, doesn't make that faith true. If that were the case, then there are many true religions worldwide.

I have explained this before. I have not said that Christianity is the only religion that is persecuted. I made the point in reference to the Apostles' and early Christians' willingness to die rather than recant their faith as evidence for the resurrection. People will die for something they believe in but they do not die for something they know is a lie. The Apostles and early Christians were eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ. If they knew the resurrection was a lie, it is unlikely that they would be willing to die for that lie. If on the other hand, they knew Christ was risen because they witnessed it, they would be emboldened.

By the way, Hitler persecuted the Jews, not for their faith, but rather because of their race.

[QUOTE="dog64"]

And I'm still waiting on an answer to this:

[QUOTE="dog64"]

I find it odd that you repeat this. Christianity isn't the only religion that is persecuted. Many religions worldwide are persecuted. Some religions are banned in some countries, and those religious members have to sneak their ways to have religious gatherings. Even today there are people that are being killed for their religious beliefs, and not just Christians. You also can't forget in past history, where many Jews were tortured and killed under Hitler So, just because people are willing to die for their faith, doesn't make that faith true. If that were the case, then there are many true religions worldwide.

blackregiment

I have explained this before. I have not said that Christianity is the only religion that is persecuted. I made the point in reference to the Apostles' and early Christians' willingness to die rather than recant their faith as evidence for the resurrection. People will die for something they believe in but they do not die for something they know is a lie. The Apostles and early Christians were eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ. If they knew the resurrection was a lie, it is unlikely that they would be willing to die for that lie. If on the other hand, they knew Christ was risen because they witnessed it, they would be emboldened.

By the way, Hitler persecuted the Jews, not for their faith, but rather because of their race.

People can honestly believe in something, and sacrifice themselves for it, even if it is not true. The fact that the apostles were willing to die proves nothing beyond that they truly believed either that Jesus had resurrected, or that they believed that, for some reason, lying about such would incur God's favor.

"I am still waiting on an answer as to why he feels following Christ is a "dangerous way to live."

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

Oh really. So living in obedience to the Lord, avoiding things like murder, lying, stealing, adultery, lust, sex before marriage, abuse of alcohol and drugs, dishonoring one's parents, all while seeking to do good works in service to the Lord such as helping the less fortunate is "a dangerous way to live".

Since when?

RadBooley

If this thread was out there advocating that people not murder, lie, steal, cheat, or any of that, there wouldn't be an issue.

Unfortunately, the fact that this thread has over 1,300 posts tells you that's not what the discussion is about.

It also might be a good thing to notice that I never actually said "following Christ is a dangerous way to live." I was talking about how religious fundamentalism, extremism, and a closed mind are dangerous. In fact, I said the following:

I still don't get why you're so convinced that Christianity is the only religion out there that has merit. Sure, the Bible may say so, but no religion is going to have a holy text that recognizes the legitimacy of other beliefs.

I just feel that believing in something without question, then claiming all other beliefs to be false, is a dangerous way to live.

RadBooley

And I still believe that's a valid concern.

[QUOTE="dog64"]

And I'm still waiting on an answer to this:

[QUOTE="dog64"]

I find it odd that you repeat this. Christianity isn't the only religion that is persecuted. Many religions worldwide are persecuted. Some religions are banned in some countries, and those religious members have to sneak their ways to have religious gatherings. Even today there are people that are being killed for their religious beliefs, and not just Christians. You also can't forget in past history, where many Jews were tortured and killed under Hitler So, just because people are willing to die for their faith, doesn't make that faith true. If that were the case, then there are many true religions worldwide.

blackregiment

I have explained this before. I have not said that Christianity is the only religion that is persecuted. I made the point in reference to the Apostles' and early Christians' willingness to die rather than recant their faith as evidence for the resurrection. People will die for something they believe in but they do not die for something they know is a lie. The Apostles and early Christians were eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ. If they knew the resurrection was a lie, it is unlikely that they would be willing to die for that lie. If on the other hand, they knew Christ was risen because they witnessed it, they would be emboldened.

By the way, Hitler persecuted the Jews, not for their faith, but rather because of their race.

Well, anyone who believes in anything doesn't think that it's a lie. If a person dies for something they believe in, they obviously didn't think it was a lie. So, you can say for everyone worldwide who dies for their faith that if they knew it was a lie, it would be unlikely that they would die for that lie. But that obviously isn't enough to say that it really wasn't a lie.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

[QUOTE="dog64"]

chessmaster1989

I have explained this before. I have not said that Christianity is the only religion that is persecuted. I made the point in reference to the Apostles' and early Christians' willingness to die rather than recant their faith as evidence for the resurrection. People will die for something they believe in but they do not die for something they know is a lie. The Apostles and early Christians were eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ. If they knew the resurrection was a lie, it is unlikely that they would be willing to die for that lie. If on the other hand, they knew Christ was risen because they witnessed it, they would be emboldened.

By the way, Hitler persecuted the Jews, not for their faith, but rather because of their race.

People can honestly believe in something, and sacrifice themselves for it, even if it is not true. The fact that the apostles were willing to die proves nothing beyond that they truly believed either that Jesus had resurrected, or that they believed that, for some reason, lying about such would incur God's favor.

There is only one problem with that speculation. They were Jewish and followed God's Commandments. God forbade lying. They lived under Jewsh Old Testament Law and lying was forbidden as evidenced by these verses from the Old Testament.

Exo 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Psa 101:7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.

Pro 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.

Pro 25:18 A man that beareth false witness against his neighbor is a maul, and a sword, and a sharp arrow.
Pro 25:19 Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint.

That rules out your speculation.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

[QUOTE="dog64"]

dog64

I have explained this before. I have not said that Christianity is the only religion that is persecuted. I made the point in reference to the Apostles' and early Christians' willingness to die rather than recant their faith as evidence for the resurrection. People will die for something they believe in but they do not die for something they know is a lie. The Apostles and early Christians were eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ. If they knew the resurrection was a lie, it is unlikely that they would be willing to die for that lie. If on the other hand, they knew Christ was risen because they witnessed it, they would be emboldened.

By the way, Hitler persecuted the Jews, not for their faith, but rather because of their race.

Well, anyone who believes in anything doesn't think that it's a lie. If a person dies for something they believe in, they obviously didn't think it was a lie. So, you can say for everyone worldwide who dies for their faith that if they knew it was a lie, it would be unlikely that they would die for that lie. But that obviously isn't enough to say that it really wasn't a lie.

You keep forgetting the eyewitness to the resurrection part. Is that intentional?

[QUOTE="dog64"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

I have explained this before. I have not said that Christianity is the only religion that is persecuted. I made the point in reference to the Apostles' and early Christians' willingness to die rather than recant their faith as evidence for the resurrection. People will die for something they believe in but they do not die for something they know is a lie. The Apostles and early Christians were eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ. If they knew the resurrection was a lie, it is unlikely that they would be willing to die for that lie. If on the other hand, they knew Christ was risen because they witnessed it, they would be emboldened.

By the way, Hitler persecuted the Jews, not for their faith, but rather because of their race.

blackregiment

Well, anyone who believes in anything doesn't think that it's a lie. If a person dies for something they believe in, they obviously didn't think it was a lie. So, you can say for everyone worldwide who dies for their faith that if they knew it was a lie, it would be unlikely that they would die for that lie. But that obviously isn't enough to say that it really wasn't a lie.

You keep forgetting the eyewitness to the resurrection part. Is that intentional?

You keep assuming that the eyewitness accounts were truely accurate.

Why are they accurate?

Because the bible says so? It's hard to prove something actually happened if you have to use the source to prove itself.

Because there's no reason for them to lie? Who says they're lying? There did not necessarily have to be any malicious intent. There's a whole bunch of factors that could have contributed to biblical inaccuracy.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

I have explained this before. I have not said that Christianity is the only religion that is persecuted. I made the point in reference to the Apostles' and early Christians' willingness to die rather than recant their faith as evidence for the resurrection. People will die for something they believe in but they do not die for something they know is a lie. The Apostles and early Christians were eyewitnesses to the resurrected Christ. If they knew the resurrection was a lie, it is unlikely that they would be willing to die for that lie. If on the other hand, they knew Christ was risen because they witnessed it, they would be emboldened.

By the way, Hitler persecuted the Jews, not for their faith, but rather because of their race.

blackregiment

People can honestly believe in something, and sacrifice themselves for it, even if it is not true. The fact that the apostles were willing to die proves nothing beyond that they truly believed either that Jesus had resurrected, or that they believed that, for some reason, lying about such would incur God's favor.

There is only one problem with that speculation. They were Jewish and followed God's Commandments. God forbade lying. They lived under Jewsh Old Testament Law and lying was forbidden as evidenced by these verses from the Old Testament.

Exo 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Psa 101:7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.

Pro 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.

Pro 25:18 A man that beareth false witness against his neighbor is a maul, and a sword, and a sharp arrow.
Pro 25:19 Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint.

That rules out your speculation.

I'm *pretty* certain that the Qur'an also forbids murder, but that doesn't stop Muslim suicide bombers ;).

You keep forgetting the eyewitness to the resurrection part. Is that intentional?

blackregiment

From where, the Bible? How do you know that they were eyewitnesses? We're weren't around back then, and these eyewitnesses are not around today. So all we have to go by are the words in the Bible, and words alone. Remember that no book can prove itself. If something is predicted in the Bible and is said to happen later in the Bible, that's not valid proof. Valid proof would be for something to be predicted in the Bible, and can be proven to of come true by observing it today.

And I still believe that's a valid concern.

RadBooley

I guess then you are acknowledging that you cannot really offer any tangible reasons why it is a "dangerous way to live". I didn't expect you could.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

You keep forgetting the eyewitness to the resurrection part. Is that intentional?

dog64

From where, the Bible? How do you know that they were eyewitnesses? We're weren't around back then, and these eyewitnesses are not around today. So all we have to go by are the words in the Bible, and words alone. Remember that no book can prove itself. If something is predicted in the Bible and is said to happen later in the Bible, that's not valid proof. Valid proof would be for something to be predicted in the Bible, and can be proven to of come true by observing it today.

I don't accept your premise. I do not accept that the New Testament authors were liars.

By the way, using your logic, you must throw out all of ancient history.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

People can honestly believe in something, and sacrifice themselves for it, even if it is not true. The fact that the apostles were willing to die proves nothing beyond that they truly believed either that Jesus had resurrected, or that they believed that, for some reason, lying about such would incur God's favor.

chessmaster1989

There is only one problem with that speculation. They were Jewish and followed God's Commandments. God forbade lying. They lived under Jewsh Old Testament Law and lying was forbidden as evidenced by these verses from the Old Testament.

Exo 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Psa 101:7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.

Pro 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.

Pro 25:18 A man that beareth false witness against his neighbor is a maul, and a sword, and a sharp arrow.
Pro 25:19 Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint.

That rules out your speculation.

I'm *pretty* certain that the Qur'an also forbids murder, but that doesn't stop Muslim suicide bombers ;).

I am not going to get into the teachings of the Koran but you might want to do some research on that before making that statement.

[QUOTE="RadBooley"]

And I still believe that's a valid concern.

blackregiment

I guess then you are acknowledging that you cannot really offer any tangible reasons why it is a "dangerous way to live". I didn't expect you could.

I don't think anyone really thinks that Christianity, or any religion, is a "dangerous way to live"... well, maybe Rad, but I have no idea why.

As with many things, religion can cause problems when people attempt to force their religions on other people. Otherwise, for the most part, though, it's really not that important to me what/who people choose to worship.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

[QUOTE="dog64"]

Well, anyone who believes in anything doesn't think that it's a lie. If a person dies for something they believe in, they obviously didn't think it was a lie. So, you can say for everyone worldwide who dies for their faith that if they knew it was a lie, it would be unlikely that they would die for that lie. But that obviously isn't enough to say that it really wasn't a lie.

RadBooley

You keep forgetting the eyewitness to the resurrection part. Is that intentional?

You keep assuming that the eyewitness accounts were truely accurate.

Why are they accurate?

Because the bible says so? It's hard to prove something actually happened if you have to use the source to prove itself.

Because there's no reason for them to lie? Who says they're lying? There did not necessarily have to be any malicious intent. There's a whole bunch of factors that could have contributed to biblical inaccuracy.

There is a lot to be considered such as...

In order for one not to believe that Jesus is God, that He was raised from the dead, which therefore proves that God exists, they would have to deny the truth of the empty tomb and the Resurrection. In addition, they would have to deny the fulfillment of hundreds of prophecies in Christ. .

They would have to believe that the Apostles and early Christians made up the resurrection account. This would require a rational explanation for why the Apostles and early Christians would willingly endure persecution and death for something they knew was a lie? The Apostles and early Christians were stoned, beheaded, boiled in oil, imprisoned, crucified, scourged, fed to lions, clothed in animal skins and then torn apart by wild beasts, tarred and lit on fire, disemboweled, burnt at the stake, etc., rather than recant their faith.

A rational explanation would be required as to why the Jewish Priests and Roman authorities that wanted so much to stamp out early Christianity, as evidenced by their persecution of Christians, chose not to display Jesus' body to disprove the claims of the followers of Christ that he had arose from the dead.

A rational explanation would be required for the dramatic change in the Apostles' behavior. They scattered and even denied knowing Jesus when He was arrested. After His death, they were crushed, in hiding, their Messiah put to death like a common criminal. Suddenly, after Jesus appeared to them there was a dramatic change. They began to openly preach the Gospel in the Temple in Jerusalem, the very city where Jesus was crucified. The very city where there were living eyewitnesses to the events that would have refuted them if they were lying. They were told to stop but defied the authorities. The endured persecution and ultimately death rather than recant their faith because they believed they saw, touched, and fellowshipped with the resurrected Jesus.

Also needing rational explanation would be why the Apostles were bold enough to preach the resurrection in Jerusalem, the very city where Christ was crucified, to crowds that lived during those events and could have easily disputed the resurrection claims publicly. If they were spreading a lie, why did they not go to some remote area where there were no eyewitnesses to the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ that could disputed their claims if they were lying?

Finally, one would need to explain why the early Church grew so quickly in a pagan world, especially when it was under intense persecution. Even today, in countries like North Korea and China, where Christians are under the most intense persecution, the Church is growing faster than in areas with less persecution.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that you are not entitled to your beliefs, far be it to impose on your free will, but personally, when one rationally considers the evidence, the reasonable and rational belief is in the truth of Christianity.

I am not going to get into the teachings of the Koran but you might want to do some research on that before making that statement. blackregiment

Well I have to get off. I have enjoyed the discussion. Till later, God bless.

I don't accept your premise. I do not accept that the New Testament authors were liars.

By the way, using your logic, you must throw out all of ancient history.

blackregiment

I never said that they were liars. All I'm asking is how you can be so certain about these eyewitnesses. As for ancient history, that can be observed. We can see the pyramids, and we can dig up ancient tools used by past civilizations, and we can also study what history is all around in historic locations. What do you have to show for these eyewitnesses besides the Bible?

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

There is only one problem with that speculation. They were Jewish and followed God's Commandments. God forbade lying. They lived under Jewsh Old Testament Law and lying was forbidden as evidenced by these verses from the Old Testament.

Exo 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Psa 101:7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.

Pro 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.

Pro 25:18 A man that beareth false witness against his neighbor is a maul, and a sword, and a sharp arrow.
Pro 25:19 Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint.

That rules out your speculation.

blackregiment

I'm *pretty* certain that the Qur'an also forbids murder, but that doesn't stop Muslim suicide bombers ;).

I am not going to get into the teachings of the Koran but you might want to do some research on that before making that statement.

""For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's sovereignty), but afterwards lo! Many of them become prodigals of the earth."

"Fight for the sake of Allah those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. Allah does not love the aggressors."

Hmm... I really don't see how those two passages condone suicide bombing. ;)

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

I guess then you are acknowledging that you cannot really offer any tangible reasons why it is a "dangerous way to live". I didn't expect you could.

chessmaster1989

I don't think anyone really thinks that Christianity, or any religion, is a "dangerous way to live"... well, maybe Rad, but I have no idea why.

As with many things, religion can cause problems when people attempt to force their religions on other people. Otherwise, for the most part, though, it's really not that important to me what/who people choose to worship.

*grumble grumble*

Making me go find the contents of my post again...

I still don't get why you're so convinced that Christianity is the only religion out there that has merit. Sure, the Bible may say so, but no religion is going to have a holy text that recognizes the legitimacy of other beliefs.

I just feel that believing in something without question, then claiming all other beliefs to be false, is a dangerous way to live.

RadBooley

I didn't say Christianity or following Christ was a dangerous way to live. Blackregiment just took it out of context (as usual). In fact, I never even said believing in religion was dangerous either.

I was talking about blind adherance to anything being dangerous. It's irresponsible to believe in something without ever questioning it. Be it religion, politics, anything. It leads to extremism, and we all know the dangers of that.

I'll say again, Blackregiment, I don't get why you are convinced your religion is the only right one when it has just as much proof to back it up as every other religion out there. I don't care what you personally believe, but I don't like how every other equally-valid religion is percieved to be wrong.

Well I have to get off. I have enjoyed the discussion. Till later, God bless.

blackregiment

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

I don't think anyone really thinks that Christianity, or any religion, is a "dangerous way to live"... well, maybe Rad, but I have no idea why.

As with many things, religion can cause problems when people attempt to force their religions on other people. Otherwise, for the most part, though, it's really not that important to me what/who people choose to worship.

RadBooley

*grumble grumble*

Making me go find the contents of my post again...

I still don't get why you're so convinced that Christianity is the only religion out there that has merit. Sure, the Bible may say so, but no religion is going to have a holy text that recognizes the legitimacy of other beliefs.

I just feel that believing in something without question, then claiming all other beliefs to be false, is a dangerous way to live.

RadBooley

I didn't say Christianity or following Christ was a dangerous way to live. Blackregiment just took it out of context (as usual). In fact, I never even said believing in religion was dangerous either.

I was talking about blind adherance to anything being dangerous. It's irresponsible to believe in something without ever questioning it. Be it religion, politics, anything. It leads to extremism, and we all know the dangers of that.

I'll say again, Blackregiment, I don't get why you are convinced your religion is the only right one when it has just as much proof to back it up as every other religion out there. I don't care what you personally believe, but I don't like how every other equally-valid religion is percieved to be wrong.

Oh, I did not realize that your comments were taken out of context.

I apologize for my comment, and I retract my statement about you thinking Christianity was a dangerous way to live.

Please accept my apology. :)

Oh, I did not realize that your comments were taken out of context.

I apologize for my comment, and I retract my statement about you thinking Christianity was a dangerous way to live.

Please accept my apology. :)

chessmaster1989

Hah, don't worry about it. :P It's not your fault.

I just don't need the things I say to be altered, then used against me to prove I'm wrong.

Hah, don't worry about it. :P It's not your fault.

I just don't need the things I say to be altered, then used against me to prove I'm wrong.

RadBooley

[QUOTE="RadBooley"] Hah, don't worry about it. :P It's not your fault.

I just don't need the things I say to be altered, then used against me to prove I'm wrong.

Crushmaster

Me personally? Yeah.

But I'm not here trying to convince anybody otherwise. I'd just like to see a few posters be more open with their perception of other religions, and if possible, examine their own a little bit more for flaws.

Me personally? Yeah.

But I'm not here trying to convince anybody otherwise. I'd just like to see a few posters be more open with their perception of other religions, and if possible, examine their own a little bit more for flaws.

RadBooley

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

Oh, I did not realize that your comments were taken out of context.

I apologize for my comment, and I retract my statement about you thinking Christianity was a dangerous way to live.

Please accept my apology. :)

RadBooley

Hah, don't worry about it. :P It's not your fault.

I just don't need the things I say to be altered, then used against me to prove I'm wrong.

Oh please, it is pretty clear what you were referring to. You were referring to Christianity and Biblical Christians that refuse to compromise the Word of God. Spin it all you want but it was very clear. You continue to expect Christians to accept other faiths as valid. You have referenced it in several recent posts in this thread. The correct definition of tolerance is respecting the right of others to hold whatever beliefs they choose, it does not mandate the politically correct notion that one must accept all beliefs and faiths as equally valid.

[QUOTE="Crushmaster"]

[QUOTE="RadBooley"] Hah, don't worry about it. :P It's not your fault.

I just don't need the things I say to be altered, then used against me to prove I'm wrong.

RadBooley

Me personally? Yeah.

But I'm not here trying to convince anybody otherwise. I'd just like to see a few posters be more open with their perception of other religions, and if possible, examine their own a little bit more for flaws.

And do tell us, what "flaws" have you identified in God's plan of redemption in Christ?

Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
Isa 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counselor?

[QUOTE="blackregiment"] I am not going to get into the teachings of the Koran but you might want to do some research on that before making that statement. Crushmaster

Hypocrisy much? I believe i was you who wrote in the original post, that you want the discussion to revolve around Bible....... By all means, post these 'interesting' things but don't expect me to not to reply because you want this thread to be concerned with Christianity alone.

[QUOTE="RadBooley"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

Oh, I did not realize that your comments were taken out of context.

I apologize for my comment, and I retract my statement about you thinking Christianity was a dangerous way to live.

Please accept my apology. :)

blackregiment

Hah, don't worry about it. :P It's not your fault.

I just don't need the things I say to be altered, then used against me to prove I'm wrong.

Oh please, it is pretty clear what you were referring to. You were referring to Christianity and Biblical Christians that refuse to compromise the Word of God. Spin it all you want but it was very clear. You continue to expect Christians to accept other faiths as valid. You have referenced it in several recent posts in this thread. The correct definition of tolerance is respecting the right of others to hold whatever beliefs they choose, it does not mandate the politically correct notion that one must accept all beliefs and faiths as equally valid.

Oh, plesae, it is pretty clear that you are taking his words out of context. He referred to all beliefs, not simply to Christianity. I tend to agree that accepting any belief concerning God unquestioningly is not... well, I don't know how to put it without offending people.

Oh, and, for the record, I am an atheist, but I recognize the possibility of God's existence. I just tend to think that God does not exist.

[QUOTE="RadBooley"]Me personally? Yeah.

But I'm not here trying to convince anybody otherwise. I'd just like to see a few posters be more open with their perception of other religions, and if possible, examine their own a little bit more for flaws.

Crushmaster

Let's see... according to... well, myself...

I still don't get why you're so convinced that Christianity is the only religion out there that has merit. Sure, the Bible may say so, but no religion is going to have a holy text that recognizes the legitimacy of other beliefs.

I just feel that believing in something without question, then claiming all other beliefs to be false, is a dangerous way to live.

RadBooley

You make it seem as if I never gave any thought or question to my beliefs. I was raised Christian, then decided that there were far too many issues with it for me to honestly believe in it. I'm still open to changing my beliefs (I feel that everyone should decide upon their own personal philosophy rather than just go along with a religion without question). That's why I feel that I am not living dangerously. I'm not here to convert anyone.

Whereas, most of the arguments I've seen here are just... it's true because the Bible says it. No amount of debating, nor any amount of facts seem to be enough to get somebody like Blackregiment to recognize any of the flaws in the Bible. The Bible is just flawless... because it is. Anybody can see the problem with that line of reasoning.

I don't really care what somebody believes, but when they go around denouncing the validity of other religions that have just as much basis behind them as their own... that's where I have an issue.

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

I don't accept your premise. I do not accept that the New Testament authors were liars.

By the way, using your logic, you must throw out all of ancient history.

dog64

I never said that they were liars. All I'm asking is how you can be so certain about these eyewitnesses. As for ancient history, that can be observed. We can see the pyramids, and we can dig up ancient tools used by past civilizations, and we can also study what history is all around in historic locations. What do you have to show for these eyewitnesses besides the Bible?

I am certain of God's truth through the testimony of the Hoky Spirit who indwells me as well as every other born again Christian.

By the way, pyramids and tools are not faiths. There have been thousands of archaeological discoveries that have verified people, places, and events recorded in the Bible and not one single one that has ever disproved a single person, place or event recorded in the Bible.

[QUOTE="RadBooley"]

[QUOTE="Crushmaster"]
Out of curiosity...do you, without question, believe Jesus Christ did not rise from the dead, and think anyone who believes otherwise is wrong?

blackregiment

Me personally? Yeah.

But I'm not here trying to convince anybody otherwise. I'd just like to see a few posters be more open with their perception of other religions, and if possible, examine their own a little bit more for flaws.

And do tell us, what "flaws" have you identified in God's plan of redemption in Christ?

Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
Isa 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counselor?

Let me just say, wherever it is in God's plans that allows innocents to be massacred in genocides like the one in Darfur, I can't see the reason.

[QUOTE="Crushmaster"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"] I am not going to get into the teachings of the Koran but you might want to do some research on that before making that statement. MFaraz_Hayat

Hypocrisy much? I believe i was you who wrote in the original post, that you want the discussion to revolve around Bible....... By all means, post these 'interesting' things but don't expect me to not to reply because you want this thread to be concerned with Christianity alone.

I personally find it very telling that neither BR nor Crush responded to my posting of these two Qur'anic verses:

"For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's sovereignty), but afterwards lo! Many of them become prodigals of the earth."

"Fight for the sake of Allah those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. Allah does not love the aggressors."

No. As the old saying goes, "Don't believe everything you read."SpaceMoose

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

[QUOTE="RadBooley"]

Hah, don't worry about it. :P It's not your fault.

I just don't need the things I say to be altered, then used against me to prove I'm wrong.

chessmaster1989

I personally find it very telling that neither BR nor Crush responded to my posting of these two Qur'anic verses:

"For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's sovereignty), but afterwards lo! Many of them become prodigals of the earth."

"Fight for the sake of Allah those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. Allah does not love the aggressors."

chessmaster1989

It's from one of those less-valid holy texts. Certainly, they must be flawed.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

Oh please, it is pretty clear what you were referring to. You were referring to Christianity and Biblical Christians that refuse to compromise the Word of God. Spin it all you want but it was very clear. You continue to expect Christians to accept other faiths as valid. You have referenced it in several recent posts in this thread. The correct definition of tolerance is respecting the right of others to hold whatever beliefs they choose, it does not mandate the politically correct notion that one must accept all beliefs and faiths as equally valid.

blackregiment

Hmmm... where do I ever state that?

Let's see...

My phrase: "I tend to agree that accepting any belief concerning God unquestioningly..."

I'm not even going to bother responding to your ridiculous straw man about nothing creating everything, or about the "blind faith" in the Big Bang...

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

[QUOTE="RadBooley"]

Me personally? Yeah.

But I'm not here trying to convince anybody otherwise. I'd just like to see a few posters be more open with their perception of other religions, and if possible, examine their own a little bit more for flaws.

chessmaster1989

And do tell us, what "flaws" have you identified in God's plan of redemption in Christ?

Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
Isa 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counselor?

Let me just say, wherever it is in God's plans that allows innocents to be massacred in genocides like the one in Darfur, I can't see the reason.

You cannot blame God for the actions of fallen man. You cannot lay that charge on God. God give us a free will to choose obedience to His moral law or rebellion against it. Your example shows where rebellion and disobedience to God's moral law leads.

Dr. Greenleaf was so convinced by the overwhelming evidence; he committed his life to Jesus Christ!" source: Evidence that Demands a Verdict

blackregiment

Ooh, can I have web pages written about me too?

"RadBooley was so convinced by the overwhelming evidence, he renounced his beliefs and became an atheist!"

Or does my story have to be more than 150 years old to be valid? :(

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

And do tell us, what "flaws" have you identified in God's plan of redemption in Christ?

Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
Isa 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counselor?

blackregiment

Let me just say, wherever it is in God's plans that allows innocents to be massacred in genocides like the one in Darfur, I can't see the reason.

You cannot blame God for the actions of fallen man. You cannot lay that charge on God. God give us a free will to choose obedience to His moral law or rebellion against it. Your example shows where rebellion and disobedience to God's moral law leads.

Sorry, but I don't accept that a benevolent and omnipotent (casting aside the self-contradictory nature of omnipotence) God would allow thousands upon thousands of innocents to suffer.

[QUOTE="dog64"]

[QUOTE="blackregiment"]

I don't accept your premise. I do not accept that the New Testament authors were liars.

By the way, using your logic, you must throw out all of ancient history.

blackregiment

I never said that they were liars. All I'm asking is how you can be so certain about these eyewitnesses. As for ancient history, that can be observed. We can see the pyramids, and we can dig up ancient tools used by past civilizations, and we can also study what history is all around in historic locations. What do you have to show for these eyewitnesses besides the Bible?

I am certain of God's truth through the testimony of the Hoky Spirit who indwells me as well as every other born again Christian.

By the way, pyramids and tools are not faiths. There have been thousands of archaeological discoveries that have verified people, places, and events recorded in the Bible and not one single one that has ever disproved a single person, place or event recorded in the Bible.

Many people claim to have the holy spirit. Either they're wrong, in which case you should also question if you have the holy spirit, or that they really do have the holy spirit of their own god, which would mean that there is more than one god. Or, it could also mean that god accepts all faiths.

Pyramids and tools are examples of observations of histrory, or proof if you will. I said this because you said that by using my logic, we should throw out all of ancient history. No, we can observe ancient history, and then I gave those examples.

You cannot blame God for the actions of fallen man. You cannot lay that charge on God. God give us a free will to choose obedience to His moral law or rebellion against it. Your example shows where rebellion and disobedience to God's moral law leads.

blackregiment

Sure I can! If he's so benevolent and loving, why doesn't he do something about it?

What's the point of there even being a god if he just lets his creations beat the everloving crap out of each other? Some father he is.