Distilling Spiritual Issues to The Irreducible

Originally posted by googlefudge

Mankind has regarded Christ as the pivotal and most controversial person since
(and even before recorded) history began and rejected Him at nearly every turn

Um no. Not even a little bit true.

JC was invented a little less than 2000 years ago.

Which is a lot more recent than the beginning of recorded history.

And even in the ...[text shortened]... l haven't Answered my questions from page 1 of this thread.

Would you like to have a go now?

Christ has been repeatedly rejected generation to generation since the first love birds were booted out of the park, and ever since, by smart people like yourself and a very high percentage of all of the posters to this forum since it began. Who, I ask, would you nominate as having received more thumbs down in human history? Who (or is it, whom)? Please restate the earlier question you'd like me to comment on. Thank you.
-

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Christ has been repeatedly rejected generation to generation since the first love birds were booted out of the park, and ever since, by smart people like yourself and a very high percentage of all of the posters to this forum since it began. Who, I ask, would you nominate as having received more thumbs down in human history? Who (or is it, whom)? Please restate the earlier question you'd like me to comment on. Thank you.
-

Did you notice that I responded to your latest PM?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Did you notice that I responded to your latest PM?

Yes.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"Until a man changes his mind about Christ (the correct meaning of 'repent'😉, there is no hope of spiritual birth, eternal salvation and an eternal relationship with God forever in Heaven." (op) Mankind has regarded Christ as the pivotal and most controversial person since (and even before recorded) history began and rejected Him at nearly every turn. P ...[text shortened]... your persuasion but may be too timid or afraid to come in out of the cold. Thanks. (gb)
-

Once, twice and three times NONSENSE. People who think this way do not even understand their own book.

No offense meant.

Originally posted by shiloh
Once, twice and three times NONSENSE. People who think this way do not even understand their own book.

Sadly, some do remain ignorant infants their entire life.

Agreed.

Originally posted by shiloh
Agreed.

Chess?

Why, certainly.

Originally posted by shiloh
Why, certainly.

(Unrated, Friendly Game 3/7, your move)

Originally posted by googlefudge
Oh so you have evidence for your gods existence now and are not just believing based on blind faith.

Great. Share it with us.

My faith is not blind. At least not in the way that you mean it, i.e. irrational.

Originally posted by Suzianne
My faith is not blind. At least not in the way that you mean it, i.e. irrational.

You believe in your god based on blind faith.

As in you believe in your god without any evidence that justifies belief in your god and despite
evidence that indicates that you god doesn't exist.


Which is by definition Irrational.

And you have admitted as much, even lauded it, claiming that you were not supposed to have
any evidence because then you wouldn't be able to believe based on faith as you would then
have evidence and know.


You either believe in your god based on evidence. In which case I want to see it.

Or you believe in the absence of evidence or despite evidence to the contrary.

Which is by definition irrational.