WOW! So many points and so little time!
First any sane debate requires a definition of terms. I suggest that we strive to stick with them because words interpreted heterogeneously causes chaos.
Proof should be used to mean clear, replicatable, scientific facts that can be interpretted in NO OTHER WAY.
Evidence should be taken to mean either facts or experiences (first or second hand, since third hand is hearsay and inadmissable). The Bible’s prose in and unto itself is not evidence unless supported by reason or third part corroboration.
Logic three types: (1) Aristotlean or syllogism; (2) deductive; (3) inductive. All logic is admissable unless shown to be specious. For this discussion logic does not connotate
Proof.
Reason That which seperates humans from animals. The ‘‘Why?’’ question. The basis for the
Love decision.
Brain physiological tool that permits demonstration of intelligence and reasoning.
Soul that which makes each person who he/she is. A spiritual not a physical phenomenon.
Based on this we should all agree that there is no
Proof that God exists. That said, this is ONLY because God does
NOT WANT there to be such
proof.
The notion that man’s free will will be eliminated if God fully revealed himself is critical.
This is another way of saying the same thing.
Otherwise the argument as to why God does not reveal himself to all people in a clear and unambiguous manner would have no suitable answer.
WRONG!!! There is a totally logical and thesis necessary answer.
I agree it’s a silly solution but it seems to be the best that centuries of theological thinking has been able to come up with.
Silly?? Let’s talk!
God is LOVE!!!
Love is the opposite—not of hate but ---- of SELFISHNESS!!!
Pascal’s wager is totally SELFISH and therefore
antithetical to God or Love.
If anyone chooses God out of selfishness then (s)he still doesn’t ‘‘get it’’ — the Love thing!
Now, even though there is no
Proof that God exists there is incredible
EVIDENCE that He does. The only one who denies this is a person who resigns him/herself to a world without
reason. If you accept the Big Bang then you accept a beginning. If you accept a beginning and cannot explain why then you must rely on something ‘‘greater’’, or a ‘‘creator’’’.
If one runs the probabilities of the physical conditions necessary but not sufficient for our earth to exist as it does then even Carl sagan’s ‘‘billions and billions’’ of stars are not sufficient to make this earth probable. As a matter of fact, the odds are a SQUARE of the star count!!!
Though the Bible might be ‘‘just a storybook’’ its integrity is PROVEN by the Dead Sea Scrolls. If one analyzes the text (e.g. just take the symetry of Abraham’s intrerupted sacrifice of Issac with God’s sacrifice of Jesus) one finds many Old & New Testament correlations that CANNOT — logically — be interpreted as chance. You know coincidence is God’s way of remaining anonymous.
If one refuses logic then please leave this board. Chaos and randomness are not debatable.
If one accepts logic, would it be logical that thousands of early Christians (especially thsose who personnally KNEW Jesus) would willingly go to their death as martyrs rather than lying and denying Christ risen?? Would you?
How logical would it be to plan a joke on the world in which we pretend to be immortal and all we have to do is be willing to die horrible deaths? If these were idiots who prayed themselves into frenzy then they would not write such a coherently intergrated and logical book. If they were charlatans they would not have included nebulous verses that cause consternation among scholars, would they?
If an armed force demanded that you denounce the existence of George Washington (or the Holocast or the lunar landing) or they would kill you, would you so denounce??
If not, how
sure must you be to die for your belief?
If one cannot yet believe in God, try believing in
Love (since it is the same thing).
The more you love, the less selfish you become (have you been a parent or a grand parent?).
The more you love the more logic you will see in the Bible.
The more logical you become the more open you will be to God’s revelations.
The more open you are to His Revelation, the more sure you will be in Him.
Then you, too, might be willing to lay down your life for love and for God.
BTW how does religion hurt anyone??
Is such an assertion based the specious logic of going from the particular to the universal?
If there were no Christianity then the whole world would most likely be ruled by folks like the Taliban. Is that what you prefer, dog eat dog?
If one had prayed for the majority of one’s life, and yet did not receive what was he/she sought, then it is most likely that this person isn’t clearly seeing what is best for him/her. It is not from a hard heart but from a biased perspective.
No more time now.
