I reject “other gods” on the basis that God became incarnate, performed miracles, proclaimed the Truth, died and rose again and left a Church that bares witness to that. I also came to the conclusion based on the gift of Faith and my own reason.
The Romans were not the only ones living in that area, and Paganism was not the dominant religion. I did not specify that no contemporaneous Romans wrote about him, I specified that no contemporaneous writer mentions him.
So I have a question for you. I have many friends who are Hindu, Buddhist, and Islamic.
Sorry, your argument doesn’t make sense. Those that witnessed could very well have become believers and then went on to spread the news or were slaughtered by Roman authorities. Again, why would Romans want word of Christ extended further into the Empire? They were trying to stop it. “Hey, we don’t want you to become Christian but check out this really cool historical event of dead people walking in the streets on the account of Jesus the Savior.” It makes no sense.
I’ll attempt to respond these questions on face value (that is, I’ll try not to muddy up the argument with contextual information that has been blatantly omitted).
Simple, I have the gift of Faith. It’s not some means to an intellectual end. Just because you don’t have that gift and don’t understand doesn’t mean you are right and I am wrong. I give them credit because they are at least open or searching. Perhaps God will lead them to the Truth in time. And just because they have a misguided view of God doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist at all. So it doesn’t excuse you.
No, it doesn’t. What are the reasons as to why there are so many Catholics as opposed to Atheists is what I’m getting at? You put statistical figures out there without clarification? For example, can it be that some of the Catholics in prison are there for reasons of immigration? Do you see what I’m getting at? Your websites do not provide this information, therefore, it makes it hard to understand the “whys” and “hows” of the statistical figures you provided. You would do best to avoid displaying such propagandic material in future.
Actually, I’m concerned with the fact that you’re 12 and yet your posting so late in the evening, don’t you have parents who know you’re awake? God bless.
That’s WAY below the belt. Mind your own business.
Heh, I think its philo.
I just got out of school. And obviously, you haven’t met many 12 year olds. 12 o clock isn’t very late. If I go to bed at 12, then wake up at 7. Thats 7 hours of sleep, and since its summer I tend to stay up later and get up later. Please don’t bother yourself with my sleeping habits.
Oh, so now, you’re playing God, since you obviously know what I’ll say before I say it.patronazing comment incoming
Uhh, obviously I have, since I’m an educator. Don’t you finish school in the middle of June?
What in tarnation are you talking about, since when is concern “hitting below the belt”.
No. I was the latest school to get out, I got out last week.
Please stop. He just didn’t think it was your place to inquire what time I go to bed.
That’s but one example I offered, there could be many more is my point. Hence, the reason I used “propagandic”. You need to demonstrate the “whys” and the “hows” of statistical data such as this, otherwise, the information is pretty useless.
The last part is a logical fallacy.
Annabea, I’m glad you’re concerned, but don’t tell me what to do when it comes to other posters. God bless.
It’s below the belt in situations like these when we’re having a decent discussion. Annabea is easily the most reflected and well-formulated debater I have ever seen in my five years on various forums, and it sucks to see the age-card being pulled in situations like these.