Originally posted by josephw
Prove it? That's easy. Jesus paid your sin debt in full on the cross, then God raised Him from the dead signifying that He accepted Jesus' substitutionary death on your behalf.

That's all the proof you need and will ever get.

Believe and receive the free gift of eternal life.

First off, the idea that someone else can pay for someone's crimes is stupid and abominable.

If I commit a crime I have to pay for it, nobody else can be punished for it to let me
off the hook.

Second, That never happened, JC probably didn't exists, and certainly wasn't resurrected, the
story is a fairy tale.

So that is no proof of anything except that your imaginary god is an [expletive].


And claiming that 'this is all the proof we need' is blatantly false.
Because we've read the fairy story and are still not buying it.
So it's evidently not all the proof we need.


And also, there is no such thing as eternal life, and it's not a free gift if you have to pay for it (by believing).

Originally posted by josephw
Prove it? That's easy. Jesus paid your sin debt in full on the cross, then God raised Him from the dead signifying that He accepted Jesus' substitutionary death on your behalf.

That's all the proof you need and will ever get.

Believe and receive the free gift of eternal life.

I think what HOH demands is a birth certificates that not even Donald Trump would question to prove that Jesus existed. In addition, you must have a live video feed of him being raised from the dead.

Not to worry, whodey will keep looking. 😠

Originally posted by josephw
Prove it? That's easy. Jesus paid your sin debt in full on the cross, then God raised Him from the dead signifying that He accepted Jesus' substitutionary death on your behalf.

That's all the proof you need and will ever get.

Believe and receive the free gift of eternal life.

our sin!!! who created sin? who chose the arbitrary method of being nailed to a cross to atone for sin? why didnt god chose being licked by puppies to atone for sin? if jesus died to absolve sin........and we keep sinning........and if i go to a priest he will absolve me of my sin again through god......and then when i die god is going to judge me again and if im sorry again, he may absolve me of my sins again!!! so what exactly is the point of jesus and his cross???

Originally posted by whodey
I think what HOH demands is a birth certificates that not even Donald Trump would question to prove that Jesus existed. In addition, you must have a live video feed of him being raised from the dead.

Not to worry, whodey will keep looking. 😠

Actually neither of those things would come close to proving JC existed (as described in the bible).

You (collectively) really don't understand what the terms evidence and proof mean do you.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Barf....

I feel the same way about atheism.

Even the most ignorant human being can comprehend atheism, because atheism's sole tenent is, "there is no God".

Therefore, atheism promotes ignorance.

Originally posted by josephw
I feel the same way about atheism.

Even the most ignorant human being can comprehend atheism, because atheism's sole tenent is, "there is no God".

Therefore, atheism promotes ignorance.

I feel the same way about anti-bigfootism.

Even the most ignorant human being can comprehend anti-bigfootism, because anti-bigfootism's sole tenet is, "there is no bigfoot".

Therefore, anti-bigfootism promotes ignorance.





Wow are you wrong in so many ways.

Atheisms 'sole tenet', it's sole requirement, is not "there is no god". It's "I/we don't have a belief in gods" (gods not god because it applies
to all gods not just your bible god)

There can be all kinds of reasons for this, the most common being that you shouldn't believe things not supported by evidence and there
is not any evidence (or sufficient evidence) to justify believing in the existence of any gods.

This doesn't mean you should stop looking. In fact if anything atheism promotes free enquiry and curiosity, rather than shut it down like religion
does.

Theism promotes ignorance, as aptly demonstrated by the posters here, as you are required to believe things by faith, that is without evidence
or despite evidence to the contrary.

You reject the scientific method, the only thing that has provided any significant knowledge of the reality we live in.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Actually neither of those things would come close to proving JC existed (as described in the bible).

You (collectively) really don't understand what the terms evidence and proof mean do you.

GF, please follow the link to the works of Flavius Josephus a Jewish Historian who has references to Jesus Christ. Not sure what references would be acceptable to you as 'proof'. surely a Roman-Jewish historian should suffice. No?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Originally posted by googlefudge
I feel the same way about anti-bigfootism.

Even the most ignorant human being can comprehend anti-bigfootism, because anti-bigfootism's sole tenet is, "there is no bigfoot".

Therefore, anti-bigfootism promotes ignorance.





Wow are you wrong in so many ways.

Atheisms 'sole tenet', it's sole requirement, is not "there is no god". It's "I/ ...[text shortened]... only thing that has provided any significant knowledge of the reality we live in.

Are you *sure* that the atheist's sole tenet isn't "I am the single most important person in my world"?

I say atheism promotes arrogance, because I have yet to meet an atheist who is not arrogant.



And besides, as I have pointed out numerous times, there is NO "evidence to the contrary" [sic], either.

Originally posted by googlefudge
This doesn't mean you should stop looking. In fact if anything atheism promotes free enquiry and curiosity, rather than shut it down like religion
does.

Religion shuts down free inquiry and curiosity? That's news to me.

You act as if you expect atheism to shut down free inquiry and curiosity though. You consistently spout your "there is no god" baloney, even though your argument has no proof either. You shut down free inquiry and curiosity by telling people to not "waste their time", since *obviously* there is no god. You "hate" theism, ostensibly because it is "dangerous", and yet consistently atheism is guilty of many of the same things you say theism is guilty of.

Originally posted by kd2acz
GF, please follow the link to the works of Flavius Josephus a Jewish Historian who has references to Jesus Christ. Not sure what references would be acceptable to you as 'proof'. surely a Roman-Jewish historian should suffice. No?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Well, I'm supposing "if I didn't see it, it didn't happen" probably suffices for most.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Are you *sure* that the atheist's sole tenet isn't "I am the single most important person in my world"?

I say atheism promotes arrogance, because I have yet to meet an atheist who is not arrogant.



And besides, as I have pointed out numerous times, there is NO "evidence to the contrary" [sic], either.

atheism doesnt premote 'im the single most important person in my world' what on earth gave you that idea?

its sad that you think all atheists are arrogant. i know many wonderful atheists (and christians and muslims). arrogance i feel is a personality trait that is not connected to religious views. its more to do with a lack of empathy.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Are you *sure* that the atheist's sole tenet isn't "I am the single most important person in my world"?

I say atheism promotes arrogance, because I have yet to meet an atheist who is not arrogant.



And besides, as I have pointed out numerous times, there is NO "evidence to the contrary" [sic], either.

Ha! There are more than a few arrogant Christians Suzi Q. Arrogant, aloof, audacious, contemptuous, disdainful, high-handed, know-it-all, presumptuous, pretentious, puffed up, scornful, self-important peacocks of Jesus. I had to break open my Thesaurus to make sure I had this adequately covered.

Tell me this, who's the better man, the one that thinks he has one life to live and needs to make the very best of it, or, the one that thinks all his little indiscretions and sometimes substantial sins will be forgiven? I've also found, rpeatedly, that if you're not part of a Christians particular club/sect/church, you are an OUTSIDER.

Originally posted by kd2acz
GF, please follow the link to the works of Flavius Josephus a Jewish Historian who has references to Jesus Christ. Not sure what references would be acceptable to you as 'proof'. surely a Roman-Jewish historian should suffice. No?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Proof of what? Its not even evidence of anything of interest. All it is is references to the existence of Christians at the time and what their beliefs were - which is almost certainly not disputed by anyone here.
How you get from that to "Jesus loves you" is a mystery.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Religion shuts down free inquiry and curiosity? That's news to me.

You act as if you expect atheism to shut down free inquiry and curiosity though. You consistently spout your "there is no god" baloney, even though your argument has no proof either. You shut down free inquiry and curiosity by telling people to not "waste their time", since *obviously* ...[text shortened]... consistently atheism is guilty of many of the same things you say theism is guilty of.

So atheism is responsible for the atrocities in Mexico an South America by Catholic warriors a few hundred years ago, like Pizzaro or Cortez?

I suppose you will bring up the fact that because Stalin was atheist that must mean
atheism is at fault.

But of course you would respond Pizzoro, Cortez, Inquisions, Crusades, forced conversion to Christianity or Muslim religion, that means nothing because it was PEOPLE who did all those bad things not the religion. The religion is off the hook forever no matter what atrocity is committed like the death in Ireland just last week of a woman because abortion was illegal, none of that had ANYTHING to do with religion. eh?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Proof of what? Its not even evidence of anything of interest. All it is is references to the existence of Christians at the time and what their beliefs were - which is almost certainly not disputed by anyone here.
How you get from that to "Jesus loves you" is a mystery.

Twhitehead, In his post dated '23 Nov '12 12:55', googlefudge made the following statement to whodey...

Actually neither of those things would come close to proving JC existed (as described in the bible).
You (collectively) really don't understand what the terms evidence and proof mean do you.


In my response to googlefudge, I merely provided a link to the works of Flavius Josephus who was a Roman-Jewish historian at the time of Jesus Christ, actually I think he was born a few years after Jesus death, burial and resurrection. Either way, this detail is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Josephus was Roman and Jewish, as a historian he would have been charged with reporting and documenting truthfully. My purpose in my response to googlefudge was to show there are outside sources aside from the bible that have an account of Jesus Christ.

Getting "Jesus loves you is a mystery" from anything I mentioned in my post or quoted by the author (googlefudge) of whom I referenced… is a 'mystery' to me. Are you sure you were referencing the right post, because it makes no sense to me. Perhaps you are referencing something else.

Additionally, I was not referring to the existence of Christians during the time of Jesus as reported by Flavius Josephus, which is true... I was referring to the reference of Jesus in 2 different parts of his historical work. Please see 3.3, there is also a reference to John the Baptist. Incidentally, 3.3 also references the resurrection.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Antiquities_of_the_Jews/Book_XVIII#Chapter_3

Now, with all that being said I do not expect this to mean anything to you or anybody else that adheres to atheism, but hopefully it will. What I have seen in most of the posts in the Spirituality Forum that relate to the existence of God or Jesus Christ is hostility from your camp (if I can use that term). Arguments have more to do with criticizing, belittling, chastising anything that a person who calls themselves a Christian has to say. Typically the atheist argument relies on science and what is understood (from what I have seen), science has not arrived in this respect, it is dynamic and in a constant state of change. It is almost as if you (generally speaking) don't want God to be true. I think when it comes to faith, spirituality, and existence of god it is probably better not to rely on what science has to say about these matters, because they are in different spheres of understanding.

The atheists dismissal of arguments and stories related to experiences of the faith of Christians and shared in the forums are insolent, and for no other reason than 'you don't believe'. If the matter cannot be explained to you and to your liking (based in science), it cannot be true and is something other than what is claimed. A strong debate is not everyone’s strong suit, but that does not change the point.

I realize that you may not call yourself an atheist... I have extrapolated. Am I wrong?

Dude, in all sincerity... The Bible is true, Jesus Christ is alive and he is coming back again. He is not just a historical figure, great teacher, or brother... he is the Son of God.