My attempt to defend Christianity from Atheist (replies greatly appriciated)

[Betterave]

Sorry been busy getting ready for finals, haven’t been able to check this in awhile. I will try and address all the replies.

already stated why i am here, learn to read…great thanks

once again, your a ****ing idiot (dont take offense to that). just because i said ive read the bible doesnt mean its the only thing ive read…hense going to sunday school/catholic school/and other classes…good attempt though

Your idea of God is silly, sir. PM if you would like to discuss more. Please don’t’ talk about anything rational, you’ve clearly let that idea go.

antitheist because i do not believe in a higher power or “God.” My “God” is the universe, and I am not worried to answer why were are here, I only care about how.
Antireligion because religions are corrupt and MAN MADE. I would love to discuss more, but it would turn into a rant, so PM me if you would like to discuss this.

Dennet is always interesting, but why is Dawkins thrown out? Science as a whole is knowledge and understanding of our universe and how it interacts. Biology plays a role in that as well, but I do agree that I wouldn’t take his philosophy of religion 100% serious, but its still always an interesting read or watch from him.

Areopagite; thank you so much for your replies. I thoroughly enjoyed reading them and thank you for not being a complete ******* like Betterrave. Once again, thank you.

Turn into a rant? I’d hate to see that! Let me respond to your arguments:

…

That was easy! Anyway, have a nice day!

 

[ManOnFire]

The concept of Time and Space is like a song that is playing right now. Yet, the song never had a beginning, or an ending. (if you say time began at x time, there was always time before that. If you think there’s a wall out there somewhere that is the end of space, there’s always something on the other side of the wall. If there’s no wall or an unlimited thick wall, then there’s still no end). Scientists don’t have cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s, autism, etc., so there’s not much we really know.

The only way to be perfectly free is to be perfectly selfish with all of one’s choices. Pop culture’s attempts to sell freedom are the easiset to sell to people : every adult child will choose to please self over others. This makes for a lonely life once the shallowness wears off.

Ultimately, adults must either choose to become mature and sacrifice for others (spouse and kids) via God’s Covenant of behaviour through the Church, or remain immature as a child at any age through the infinitesimal pursuit of shallow amusements for the self via love-less sex, drugs, excessive materialism, gluttony, etc.

After the multitude of hours of study, do you have a definitive answer yet? God’s covenant for behavior exists. God is a glass is half empty / half full choice. Yes, it really is that simple.

 

[ZDHayden]

To be honest, all of those seem distasteful. I believe in God because God can be proven through scientific inquiry and human reason. Recent science has not disprove God so much as strengthened the argument of God, so long as His believers are willing to use science. I find no contradiction between Scripture and science, as the Bible (especially the pre-Greek old Testament) was written 1) in a time when scientific knowledge was not as developed as today and 2) that the first actual historical person in the Bible is Abraham, indicating that the previous passages were stories to explain the unexplainable. Science and Theology are two sides to the same coin. Both are necessary to understand the fullness of the world. Science is the study of the physical world; theology is the study of its creator. Both are needed to understand ourselves.

 

[AntiTheist]

Ultimately, adults must either choose to become mature and sacrifice for others (spouse and kids) via God’s Covenant of behaviour through the Church, or remain immature as a child at any age through the infinitesimal pursuit of shallow amusements for the self via love-less sex, drugs, excessive materialism, gluttony, etc.

False dichotomy. One doesn’t need to believe in god in order to make mature choices.

 

[AntiTheist]

To be honest, all of those seem distasteful. I believe in God because God can be proven through scientific inquiry and human reason.

You say that your god can be proven through science, but then all you say is that he can’t be disproven and that there is no contradiction.

In my book, just because science can’t disprove or contradict something doesn’t mean that that something isn’t true. Science also does not disprove Thor, nor does it contradict him, but it doesn’t mean he’s real.

 

[ManOnFire]

False dichotomy. One doesn’t need to believe in god in order to make mature choices.

Of course one doesn’t need to believe in God. But what then would motivate someone to make mature choices? Relationships with others require sacrifice. Why not just be 100% selfish?

 

[ManOnFire]

To be honest, all of those seem distasteful. I believe in God because God can be proven through scientific inquiry and human reason. Recent science has not disprove God so much as strengthened the argument of God, so long as His believers are willing to use science. I find no contradiction between Scripture and science, as the Bible (especially the pre-Greek old Testament) was written 1) in a time when scientific knowledge was not as developed as today and 2) that the first actual historical person in the Bible is Abraham, indicating that the previous passages were stories to explain the unexplainable. Science and Theology are two sides to the same coin. Both are necessary to understand the fullness of the world. Science is the study of the physical world; theology is the study of its creator. Both are needed to understand ourselves.

Are you referring to my post #42? I was playing devil’s advocate by intentionally leaving scripture out to show atheists that there’s also a very functional side of Church doctrine. I already believe.