Question for Christians #1
- Thread starter Patrick
- Start date
-
- Tags
- christians question
Because they wrote down what jesus said, jesus was a man, what difference dose it make who wrote it?
Dear Respectful Atheist Zoldos
Please check out Ian McCormacks full length death experience and after that Lee Strobel's Movie Case for Faith.
When God(Jesus) speaks to you personally, you will know it....so do not be deceived by all the voices you hear...listen with your spirit for the Holy Spirit of the living God wrote the scriptures by man's hand through his heart.
B asic
I nstructions
B efore
L eaving
E arth
Please check out Ian McCormacks full length death experience and after that Lee Strobel's Movie Case for Faith.
When God(Jesus) speaks to you personally, you will know it....so do not be deceived by all the voices you hear...listen with your spirit for the Holy Spirit of the living God wrote the scriptures by man's hand through his heart.
B asic
I nstructions
B efore
L eaving
E arth
I respect your explainaiton but you must understand, the experiance you described is un describable, you first have to know how to listen and the events in your life when God spoke to you, you were at a place where you were open. Some people who hear God choose not to listen. I know because i was there.
Explianing faith to someone is like explaining what it is like to have a kid, the person you are speaking to will never know what it really is about until they experiance it first hand.
If you are absolutly certian that there is no God, you will never hear his voice, your heart is already hardened. Being open to the possibility is the first step, with out that, forget it. It will forever be something alien
With respect it wasn't Jesus in my head, it was Yahweh. Jesus never even came up.
I now sound crazy to every atheist here.
With respect it wasn't Jesus in my head, it was Yahweh. Jesus never even came up.
I now sound crazy to every atheist here.
Two different names for the same thing, unless you are jewish, and do not believe our savior has come, in which case, it is still the same thing
Well there is evidence, not proof, but evidence, first we count our year by his death, second there is a bible, third there is a chuch nation called the vatican that supports his existance. Where evidence to the contrary has yet to exist. Nothing science has done has disproven God. Until people can make life, by which i mean on their own and not using any of the existing parts of their body or tissues which it releases there will be no evidence that God doesn't exist so therefor faith in God is no more or less reasonable than the idea that people are hear just because.
Jesus was God and man because his father was God and his mother was man. It is simple biology where I get my asumption, if a male german shepard breeds with a female poodle, their offspring would be part germanshepard and part poodle.
That is not evidence that God exists, but only that people have believed in God.
How is that logical? If I say the sky is purple and all of you are seeing it as blue as an illusion is it logical for me to ask you to disprove it? A lot of this comes down to statistical likelihood. And recent research (and the history of modern era research) has the odds of a Christian-like (or most organized religion Gods) God existing going down and down past the lows they are already at.
"What is truth? said jesting Pilate; and would not stay for an answer."
- Francis Bacon, Essays, "Of Truth" (1597, 1625)
. . .
The Bible (and the gospels in particular) are not evidence of anything, much less proof; and certainly not that Jesus was god. For example: the colloquy between Pilate and Jesus [ref. Matt 27:11; Mark 15:2; Luke 23:3, and John 18:33-38 (KJV)], where Christ’s answer to the accusations against him is either oblique or nonresponsive [ref. Matt 27:12-14; Mark 15:3-5 (KJV)], is an example of when silence may not be evidence of guilt. Pilate’s statement "What is truth?" [ref. John: 18:38 (KJV)] may be viewed in the context of the proceedings as a rhetorical question, but it is nevertheless a telling one. "Then said Pilate to the chief priests and [to] the people, I find no fault in this man." [ref. Luke 23:4 (KJV)]. The truth, if any, that can be adduced from the accounts of the gospels is that Christ (if he existed) was not a god, the King of the Jews, or the prophesied Messiah, but only a man.
- Francis Bacon, Essays, "Of Truth" (1597, 1625)
. . .
The Bible (and the gospels in particular) are not evidence of anything, much less proof; and certainly not that Jesus was god. For example: the colloquy between Pilate and Jesus [ref. Matt 27:11; Mark 15:2; Luke 23:3, and John 18:33-38 (KJV)], where Christ’s answer to the accusations against him is either oblique or nonresponsive [ref. Matt 27:12-14; Mark 15:3-5 (KJV)], is an example of when silence may not be evidence of guilt. Pilate’s statement "What is truth?" [ref. John: 18:38 (KJV)] may be viewed in the context of the proceedings as a rhetorical question, but it is nevertheless a telling one. "Then said Pilate to the chief priests and [to] the people, I find no fault in this man." [ref. Luke 23:4 (KJV)]. The truth, if any, that can be adduced from the accounts of the gospels is that Christ (if he existed) was not a god, the King of the Jews, or the prophesied Messiah, but only a man.
Last edited:
Similar threads
