I'm talking about the part where you said holy Scripture teaches that all humans are depraved, and disagreeing. :)ChiliDragon

I can make another thread to discuss that. Want to? Also, why do you think Hell is not eternal and the punishment is corrective, instead of retributive?

You're probably right abut that part. I still disagree with you on the theological part of that though :DChiliDragon

About hell or total depravity? If hell, are you talking about it where I said it was eternal? Or something else?

[QUOTE="MatrixSamurai27"]I wouldn't be surprised, since Scripture teaches that humans are totally depraved. ChiliDragon

Well, we're talking about hell here, so it would probably be better to make that discussion its own thread.

I don't buy the claims that they are literally "rejecting" God as if they knew he existed and just hated him.GabuEx

It doesn't have to be that strong. It can be more that they refuse to become a Christian because they don't want to change their lifestyle.

If God actually existed and could offer a satisfactory answer to all of their concerns, I would be more than a little surprised if they then said "no, I hate you!" anyway.GabuEx

I wouldn't be surprised, since Scripture teaches that humans are totally depraved.

The idea of hell being an eternal torture chamber is a human creation. However, hell itself is not. It is actually a place of eternal shame and seperation from God. Because God is the source of all goodness, there will be no goodness there. Thus, his "common graces" given to all people on earth will not be there either. Furthermore, God sends people there for two reasons.

1) Sins - God's holy and moral character demands that he punish it. People go there because of their sins (moral crimes), with rejection of the Gospel just being one of those sins. Also, by the time people that go to hell die, they have already committed thousands of sins in their lifetimes.

2) Love honors choice - This one is a bit more important. Romans 1 says God's wrath is essentially honoring a person's choice by giving them over to the sins they choose. Sin is also a way of saying to God that "I don't want anything to do with you." God expresses his wrath in this life, and it is made final in eternity. He gives them the seperation they asked for. If someone can't bring themselves to choose him after 30-70 years, I don't see any reason to be upset they won't have the chance to for the rest of eternity.

*takes out sword and sheild* Someone quote me so I can have a debate....MgamerBD

Which side do you want to debate for?

Now, my debate with the last person has grown "repetitive" to say the least, and I think he gave an "interesting" counter-argument (interesting because in all the skeptical arguments I have read, I haven't seen anyone try to take that route). So does anyone else want to take a stab at my argument for Jesus' resurrection?

I will restate it.

There are several lines of evidence. We will discuss one for right now.

1. The 12 Apostles claimed to have seen Jesus risen from the dead.

2. Some of them suffered martydom for their faith because they didn't recant.

3. People do not die for something they know to be a lie.

4. Therefore, Jesus rose from the dead.

*Notice an important nuance in the argument. They didn't merely claim to believe he rose from the dead, but that they had seen him risen from the dead. Please don't make comparisons to people today who die for their religion who have no firsthand knowledge of its truthfulness.

**If you're going to claim they hallunicated in seeing him, you better be ready to explain how that was possible considering the circumstances.MatrixSamurai27

IT is questione dwhat exactly Jesus was. Many believe him to be a Jewish Preist with heretical ideas.

BumFluff122

No one that I'm aware of claims he was a priest. Jesus was not a part of the religious establishment of his day. You need to back this up with some sources.

There was also cannabis, which was found in bronze age tombs in the region, magic mushrooms, the Egyptian Lotus, a checmical similar to cocaine was also found in hair samples, and ergot mold, which was found on bread. I've read that according to Matthew 27:34 before the crucifixtion Jesus was offered wine mixed with gall while Mark 15:23 says it was mixed with myrrh. Gall is suppose to have a narcotic effect to lesson the sufferign of the individual. Also Hemlock, which is mentioend numerous times in the bible, is classified as a poison/psychoactive drug.BumFluff122

Once again, where are references for this? Also, lessoning the suffering of an individual has nothing to do with hallucinations. As for the hemlock, key word: POISON.

No that was not what I stated. Why I stated this is because Jesus would have been able to get these types of Narcottics easily and then give them to his followers. I don't know what would make you believe I was arguing "Jesus saw himself rise from the dead."BumFluff122

The problem is that you still need to demonstrate points 1 & 2 for this to have any relevance to the debate. Nothing you have said demonstrates that people in 1st century Israel would have been using these drugs, much less the apostles. You realize you're trying to dismiss the resurrection by arguing it was possible that the apostles were druggies? I mean, come on, you think this is actually rational?

That's the thing: people who go through the process that I described don't know it's a lie. They have completely succeeded at self-delusion to the point that they truly believe that everything has transpired as it was supposed to.GabuEx

For this to count for anything, I need to have good reason to think the apostles deluded themselves or were deceived. I have neither, and it being possible means nothing.

What you said gets close to proving point 1, but not close enough. Just because it was used throughout the Roman empire does not mean it was used everywhere in the Roman empire. Anyway, let's see a source for this assertion. You have offered nothing for point 2, and in fact by specifying the group of people opium use was commonly associated with, you have made it harder on yourself.

It was mostly for preists, warriors and noblemen. Guess what category Jesus falls under.BumFluff122

Jesus wasn't any of those. Although you seem to be under the impression that I'm arguing Jesus claimed to have seen the risen Jesus. Seriously, do you even know what I'm arguing?