Freeze

[Lefty8]

It was forced on me. But I did research and found nothing believable. Not a thing in the Bible makes sense, all the contradictions etc. The teachings are solid, but the stories are stupid.

We have chatted quite a bit on here and I think we both agree on what's right, so why would you think I'm a nutcase for believing in God? By the way, I try my best to do the right thing because it makes me feel good and makes others feel the same. I'm a child of God, I know what my destiny is. My comment to the other guy was about the same as a good friend of mine and I have quite often. He's an atheist, but he doesn't rail on me with disdain because I'm a believer

 

[BOSSHOGFREE]

Religion has the same basic principle as Santa Claus. In religion youre taught if you don't do good you are going to Hell. Some of us don't need religions to keep us from doing immoral things. Santa Claus is the same thing. Kids don't understand that they're not supposed to be bad so you tell them that Santa Claus is watching them & if you don't do good you're not in getting anything from Santa Claus. It is the same idiotic thing. Both imaginary creatures made invented by humans to keep the masses from doing evil. And I am still laughing at that link you sent. Was the onion.com not available?

My wife has a masters of arts in history. The historical qualification for the proof of Jesus existence is greater in what I li ked then half of what ancient history is regarded as fact without prejudice. Most historical battle reports cite only one text. You really are well out of your element in that debate.

You never answered my question of where the first particle of matter came from. What produced it. Where did it come from. Science cannot answer that question nor can your logic.

Einstein proved that space is not an empty vacume (that space itself has properties) and that light particles travel in space not through it. If space is not merely the absence of matter then what created it?

If the big bang made the universe and all matter was compressed within a singular point how did any life of any kind survive that pressure, that explosion, or that heat? There is no life in lava so how can their be life in molten rock previously compressed to an unimaginable weight then melted with the power of trillions upon trillions of stars shot throughout the cosmos faster than the speed of light?

Well, life could not survive that. It didn't survive that. Logic can't escape this.

 

[joerain]

My wife has a masters of arts in history. The historical qualification for the proof of Jesus existence is greater in what I li ked then half of what ancient history is regarded as fact without prejudice. Most historical battle reports cite only one text. You really are well out of your element in that debate.

You never answered my question of where the first particle of matter came from. What produced it. Where did it come from. Science cannot answer that question nor can your logic.

Einstein proved that space is not an empty vacume (that space itself has properties) and that light particles travel in space not through it. If space is not merely the absence of matter then what created it?

If the big bang made the universe and all matter was compressed within a singular point how did any life of any kind survive that pressure, that explosion, or that heat? There is no life in lava so how can their be life in molten rock previously compressed to an unimaginable weight then melted with the power of trillions upon trillions of stars shot throughout the cosmos faster than the speed of light?

Well, life could not survive that. It didn't survive that. Logic can't escape this.

I align with Bart Erhman's theory that Jesus was an apocalyptic Jew. Meaning, he thought the world was ending and when the "Son of Man" came (he never claimed to be this person, it was a Old Testament concept), there would be a new Kingdom that he would rule along with his 12 disciples. All of this is supported by the scripture as Erhman points out in detail. Jesus also never claimed to be God (Paul later assigns this title), he only claimed to be the Messiah whose purpose was to rule the new Kingdom with a new set of laws after the Son of Man did his business.

Regardless of your point of view, you should read some of Erhman's stuff or watch a lecture. He's forgotten more about the New Testament than we all know combined.

And his theory isn't all that far fetched. It's something that has been repeated over and over through history. Guy says some crazy stuff, people believe him, a following develops and over time the story changes to fit a narrative.

Ever been to Utah? Normal folks just like us. But they were told a crazy ass story about Joseph Smith when they were kids, they never stopped believing it and then they grew up and told their kids the same story. We think that needing magic glasses to read a tablet is a ridiculous Mormon concept but don't think twice when told that a virgin had a baby! 1000 years from now there will be a whole new set of stories and claims for us to argue about.