• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Do Skeptics Go Out of Their Way to Bash Christians?

Elvira said:
If you knew your Bible, you would know that none of that is true...God's most outstanding attribute is love..."God is love" 1 John 4:8 and all His other attributes operate within the confines love...power, justice, and wisdom...
Click to expand...

How can your god be loving when he is so violent and evil? Why did he make people who sinned when he had the ability to make them perfect and not be able to sin?

Religious belief is an example of the Stockholm Syndrome where you sympathize with your abuser or captor.
 
Lisa said:
How can your god be loving when he is so violent and evil? Why did he make people who sinned when he had the ability to make them perfect and not be able to sin?

Religious belief is an example of the Stockholm Syndrome where you sympathize with your abuser or captor.
Click to expand...

Because He did not want an earth filled with robots, but an earth filled with humans who had the free will to realize listening to Him is the best way to live...Satan called God a liar when he told Eve she would not die from eating the fruit, and therefore he raised an issue that would require time to settle...not an issue of power, but an issue of who rightfully can rule mankind...Jehovah God or Satan...in his wisdom, God knew that the best way to settle the challenge would be to allow time to pass...eventually, it would become clear who was telling the truth and who was lying...by his words, Satan implied that Eve​...and by extension...all humans ​would be better off without God’s rulership...in this case also, Jehovah knew that the best way to address the challenge would be to let Satan try to prove his point....so God has allowed Satan to rule this world for a time...that explains why we see so much suffering around us​...it’s because Satan, not God, is the real ruler of the world...

"We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one." 1 John 5:19
 
Lisa said:
How can your god be loving when he is so violent and evil? Why did he make people who sinned when he had the ability to make them perfect and not be able to sin?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do wonder ....
 
Elvira said:
Because He did not want an earth filled with robots, but an earth filled with humans who had the free will to realize listening to Him is the best way to live...Satan called God a liar when he told Eve she would not die from eating the fruit, and therefore he raised an issue that would require time to settle...not an issue of power, but an issue of who rightfully can rule mankind...Jehovah God or Satan...in his wisdom, God knew that the best way to settle the challenge would be to allow time to pass...eventually, it would become clear who was telling the truth and who was lying...by his words, Satan implied that Eve​...and by extension...all humans ​would be better off without God’s rulership...in this case also, Jehovah knew that the best way to address the challenge would be to let Satan try to prove his point....so God has allowed Satan to rule this world for a time...that explains why we see so much suffering around us​...it’s because Satan, not God, is the real ruler of the world...

"We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one." 1 John 5:19
Click to expand...
This will be your logic lesson for the day.

You cannot have free will if your god is both omniscient and omnipotent. He knows what we are going to do so it isn't your choice. His believers may sincerely believe that they have the appearance of free will but if your god is all-powerful and all-knowing, which is necessary if he is going to answer silent prayers and make decisions on right or wrong, then they do not have free will.

The idea that they do not have free will also mean that there is no such thing as religious morality because your actions are predetermined and you didn't have as a choice in the matter so there is no choice of right or wrong. You are also aksing god to change his mind and change his plans for a mortal and fallible being.

You can argue that your god is no omniscient or omnipotent but if that is true then why do you call him god when he could not have created the universe and cannot answer prayers.? You are stuck in a logical catch-22 that you are now desperate to get out of.
 
Lisa said:
This will be your logic lesson for the day.

You cannot have free will if your god is both omniscient and omnipotent. He knows what we are going to do so it isn't your choice. His believers may sincerely believe that they have the appearance of free will but if your god is all-powerful and all-knowing, which is necessary if he is going to answer silent prayers and make decisions on right or wrong, then they do not have free will.

The idea that they do not have free will also mean that there is no such thing as religious morality because your actions are predetermined and you didn't have as a choice in the matter so there is no choice of right or wrong. You are also aksing god to change his mind and change his plans for a mortal and fallible being.

You can argue that your god is no omniscient or omnipotent but if that is true then why do you call him god when he could not have created the universe and cannot answer prayers.? You are stuck in a logical catch-22 that you are now desperate to get out of.
Click to expand...

And here is yours...

A Free Moral Agent. Being made in God’s image, according to His likeness, man was a free moral agent. He had the freedom of choice to do good or bad. By his willing, loving obedience to his Creator, he was in a position to bring honor and glory to God far beyond that which the animal creation could bring. He could intelligently praise God for His wonderful qualities and could support His sovereignty. But Adam’s freedom was a relative freedom; it was not absolute. He could continue to live in happiness only if he acknowledged Jehovah’s sovereignty. This was indicated by the tree of knowledge of good and bad, from which Adam was forbidden to eat. Eating of it would be an act of disobedience, a rebellion against God’s sovereignty.​—Ge 2:9, 16, 17. Since Adam was a “son of God” (Lu 3:38), his relationship to God was that of a son to a father, and he should have obeyed accordingly. Additionally, God created in man an innate desire to render worship. This desire, if perverted, would take man in the wrong direction and would destroy his freedom, bringing him into bondage to what was created instead of to the Creator. This, in turn, would result in man’s degradation.

A rebellious spirit son of God caused Adam’s wife Eve to sin, and she placed the temptation before Adam, who deliberately entered into rebellion against Jehovah. (Ge 3:1-6; 1Ti 2:13, 14) They became like those whom Paul later described in Romans 1:20-23. By his transgression Adam lost his sonship and perfection and he introduced sin, with imperfection and death, to his offspring, the entire human race. Even at birth, they were in the image of their father Adam, imperfect, with death working in their bodies.​—Ge 3:17-19; Ro 5:12[/B
Click to expand...


Man — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
 
Lisa said:
Until you can prove that Jesus ever actually existed that supposed "great commission" is no more real than Mickey Mouse or Peter Pan. The Bible and the Gospels are the work of mortal men who never met Jesus and it has never been fact-checked by either Jesus or your mythical god, despite what someone may have convinced you or what you want to believe.

How can there possibly be a super scary judgment day when there is no god? I am no more threatened by your claims of hell and damnation then I am by a child telling me that Santa won't bring me any presents until I give in to their demands for cookies before dinner.
Click to expand...
Even then. I can supply plenty of evidence that Abe Lincoln existed and was President of the US. However if I were to believe at least one story he also fought and killed vampires. Just because something is written down about a real person doesnt mean it is all true.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Lisa said:
Your Watchtower doesn't get to redefine the concept of logic to support its delusions.

That essay is religious apologetics. Reading that idiocy is akin to watching Steve Wonder and Helen Keller argue about the color red.
Click to expand...

And you don't get to redefine God to suit your delusions...
 
roguenuke said:
Even then. I can supply plenty of evidence that Abe Lincoln existed and was President of the US. However if I were to believe at least one story he also fought and killed vampires. Just because something is written down about a real person doesnt mean it is all true.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

There is no secular evidence of Jesus, especially as the son of a god. He was very likely an itinerant street preacher who got himself killed by both the jews and Romans for preaching a heretical form of Judaism. after his death, he was deified by his followers who became an annoyance to the Romans. When they couldn't kill them off they adopted that sect for political purposes because their polytheistic gods were not popular with the masses.
 
Elvira said:
And you don't get to redefine God to suit your delusions...
Click to expand...

I don't have to redefine your god or any other god because there is no evidence that any of them exist or have ever existed. The bible is no more proof of god then Harry Potter exists, despite the fact that millions of very gulliable people believe it.

Logic is a very helpful skill to have.
 
Lisa said:
I don't have to redefine your god or any other god because there is no evidence that any of them exist or has ever existed.

Logic is a very helpful skill to have.
Click to expand...

lol...you already did redefine Him...
 
Elvira said:
lol...you already did redefine Him...
Click to expand...

I didn't redefine anything. I used logic, so don't need to play your semantic games. Don't try to accuse me of what you are doing as a way to rationalize your actions.
 
Magdalene said:
I really am curious. If you do not believe in God, our God or simply hate Him.... what is it that drives you to attack, belittle, criticize and make fun of those who do? Is it for sport? Something you enjoy? Do you think you will change our minds? :confused:
Click to expand...

Skeptics here attack religion because its a debate forum. Its very typical for people to voice their opinions on debate forums and critique ideas they disagree with. Debate is a sport for most people here and we do enjoy it. Most of us do understand that we aren't changing minds, but its just fun to debate.
 
Lisa said:
I didn't redefine anything. I used logic, so don't need to play your semantic games. Don't try to accuse me of what you are doing as a way to rationalize your actions.
Click to expand...

Wrong...it was far from logic...you sound like a five year old who stomps your feet to get your way and you want it NOW...
 
Lisa said:
There is no secular evidence of Jesus, especially as the son of a god. He was very likely an itinerant street preacher who got himself killed by both the jews and Romans for preaching a heretical form of Judaism. after his death, he was deified by his followers who became an annoyance to the Romans. When they couldn't kill them off they adopted that sect for political purposes because their polytheistic gods were not popular with the masses.
Click to expand...

I'm agreeing with you to a degree. There is little evidence for many past figures at least how they were written. Do we know a Hercules existed outside the stories? What about Pericles? Most such people are talked about until someone writes it down, and then they usually end up having exaggerated stories about them but the main person existed at one time. Robin Hood is another example. It is like a game of telephone. The story/sentence will change if it spreads through enough people (only takes a few really, more people change it more).

If you ever talk to military guys, even their own stories will change and become more grandiose with time. The movie Big Fish does a decent job of illustrating it.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Magdalene said:
I really am curious. If you do not believe in God, our God or simply hate Him.... what is it that drives you to attack, belittle, criticize and make fun of those who do? Is it for sport? Something you enjoy? Do you think you will change our minds? :confused:
Click to expand...

Where do you see this being done? Is some skeptic "preaching" non belief on the street corner or something?
 
Lisa said:
Until you can prove that Jesus ever actually existed that supposed "great commission" is no more real than Mickey Mouse or Peter Pan. The Bible and the Gospels are the work of mortal men who never met Jesus and it has never been fact-checked by either Jesus or your mythical god, despite what someone may have convinced you or what you want to believe.
Click to expand...

Yep, another history-challenged progressive.
 
Elvira said:
Wrong...it was far from logic...you sound like a five year old who stomps your feet to get your way and you want it NOW...
Click to expand...

Oh oh, you're losing yet another argument eh. It's easy to tell because when you can't come up with a coherent argument, you launch into personal attacks. In this case against Lisa.

Here's another little gem:

Elvira said:
And you don't get to redefine God to suit your delusions...
Click to expand...

So Christian.
 
Last edited:
Logicman said:
Yep, another history-challenged progressive.
Click to expand...

You might want to talk to Elvira. She says parts of the bible are fake, and she's certainly no progressive.

@Elvira - which verses were those again?
 
Last edited:
Logicman said:
Yep, another history-challenged progressive.
Click to expand...

Where is the empirical evidence of Jesus as the son of god ever existing? The Bible is a claim and not a proof. It was also not written by god or Jesus.
 
Lisa said:
Where is the empirical evidence of Jesus as the son of god ever existing? The Bible is a claim and not a proof. It was also not written by god or Jesus.
Click to expand...

Now you want "empirical evidence"!?

Firs show me the empirical evidence for these figures from antiquity:

1. Hippocrates
2. Attila the Hun
3. Archimedes of Syracuse
4. Confucius
5. Hannibal

But there are multiple, historical accounts confirming the acts and resurrection of Jesus.
 
Logicman said:
Now you want "empirical evidence"!?

Firs show me the empirical evidence for these figures from antiquity:

1. Hippocrates
2. Attila the Hun
3. Archimedes of Syracuse
4. Confucius
5. Hannibal

But there are multiple, historical accounts confirming the acts and resurrection of Jesus.
Click to expand...

There are all second hand and none of then ever saw Jesus. The Romans were famous for keeping records and there is none. Certainly they would have known about someone rising fro n the dead. The first accounts of Jesus were 2 generations after he died. The idea of a dying and rising d savior born of a virgin birth at that time of year is a very old andf often repeated myth.
 
Lisa said:
There are all second hand and none of then ever saw Jesus. The Romans were famous for keeping records and there is none. Certainly they would have known about someone rising fro n the dead. The first accounts of Jesus were 2 generations after he died. The idea of a dying and rising d savior born of a virgin birth at that time of year is a very old andf often repeated myth.
Click to expand...

<facepalm>

Why don't you liberals ever do your homework?

First of all, the earliest mention of the resurrection of Jesus was within a handful of years after the event. Details in the following article: Earliest Mention of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ << The Righter Report

Second, scholars date the entire New Testament to the 1st century. The Dating of the New Testament - bethinking.org

Third, the early church fathers UNANIMOUSLY confirmed the traditional Gospel authors. Dates in the links.

Matthew authorship - 1. Church Fathers and Matthew’s Gospel | Renewal Theology
Mark Authorship- 2. Church Fathers and Mark’s Gospel | Renewal Theology
Luke Authorship - 3. Church Fathers and Luke’s Gospel | Renewal Theology
John Authorship - https://renewal-theology.com/2019/04/15/4-church-fathers-and-johns-gospel/

Fourth, there are over forty authors who wrote about Jesus within 150 years of his death and resurrection: 9 authors from the New Testament - Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Author of of Hebrews, James, Peter, and Jude. 21 early Christian writers outside the NT - Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp, Didache, Barnabus, Shepherd of Hermas, Fragments of Papias, Justin Martyr, Aristides, Athenagoras, Theophious of Antioch, Quadratus, Aristo of Pella, Melito of Sardis, Diognetus, Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, and Epistula Apostolorum. 4 heretical writings - Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Truth, Apocryphon of John, Treatise on Resurrection. And 9 secular non-Christian sources, including Josephus, Tacticus, Pliny the Younger, Phlegon, Lucian, Celcus, Mara Bar-Serapion, Seutonius, and Thallus. A number of those were 1st century.

And fifth, do yourself a favor and read the well-researched historical accounts about Jesus, including this one from scholar Dr. Gary Habermas:

Historical Jesus Habermas.jpg

Do your homework, Lisa.

p.s. Most of ancient history is hearsay / second hand. So to keep yourself on an even keel, start ripping out major sections of your history books about people from that time period, because most of them are "second hand" accounts.
 
Last edited:
Logicman said:
Now you want "empirical evidence"!?

Firs show me the empirical evidence for these figures from antiquity:

1. Hippocrates
2. Attila the Hun
3. Archimedes of Syracuse
4. Confucius
5. Hannibal

But there are multiple, historical accounts confirming the acts and resurrection of Jesus.
Click to expand...

By that 'logic', do you believe Augustus ascended into heaven on the back of a swan? Claudius? That 'so-called' historian (Habermas) fails to distinguish between the probable and the fanciful, for he wouldn't accept such tales attached to the figures you listed above, yet he can accept it when it is his god (Jesus). Do you believe that the appearance of an eagle to a legion before a battle was a good omen? These were highly ignorant and superstitious people and they attributed everything to the supernatural.
 
Last edited:
NWO_Spook said:
By that 'logic', do you believe Augustus ascended into heaven on the back of a swan? Claudius? That 'so-called' historian (Habermas) fails to distinguish between the probable and the fanciful, for he wouldn't accept such tales attached to the figures you listed above, yet he can accept it when it is his god (Jesus). Do you believe that the appearance of an eagle to a legion before a battle was a good omen? These were highly ignorant and superstitious people and they attributed everything to the supernatural.
Click to expand...

We all know that Hannibal died and came back to life. Atilla was always turning water into wine. Logicman has been pushing this tired old argument for years here. No evidence of historical characters. He has never heard of history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom