There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[ElishaElijah]

Yes, I am progressive in that I view what it means to love in this sense has evolved over time and that is the core. If you love other humans, you live and do the work.

Have no idea how loving people could evolve to be controversial and divisive, unless that love is perverted and actually lust, violating the Bible.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Have no idea how loving people could evolve or be controversial and divisive, unless that love is perverted and actually lust, violating the Bible.

Well, that is where we differ in what is perverted and lust.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Well, that is where we differ in what is perverted and lust.

The Bible says what is perverted and what lust is, the disagreement is with God on those issues. I still don’t know what that is as far as you’re concerned because you haven’t said.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The problem is that people are saying they were a Christian but are no longer, when I hear their story and testimony it says to me that they thought they were but really weren’t, they just took a bath and followed some rules, were taught something false.

That's how I feel about people who think they know a god because they read a book and follow some rules, but they really don't. They've been taught something false and believed it.

you are taking their word but don’t know what it means to be a Christian.

No, that's you who doesn't know what a Christian is. Your definition doesn't include many people that are and were Christians, so it is inadequate as a definition.

You can believe whatever you want to, when talking about what the Bible actually says and teaches is a different matter altogether. If you say that red apple is blue and want to believe that then fine with me, I’m still going to tell you it’s red.

But you're the guy calling the apple blue.

I can tell you what the Bible says. I can tell you what any book written in my native language means except some technical books that use professional jargon or advanced mathematics. There is this myth that the scriptures are inscrutable to the casual reader which serves the needs of people who want to use them to support any position whatsoever. They come up with some doctrine, give their scriptural defense, and then deal with the rebuttal of skeptics by simply trying to disqualify their understanding of scripture using this myth.

But this is a simple book. It was an oral tradition before being written, told to children as well as their parents as instruction on what to believe and what to do. God made the world as an act of will in six days and then rested for one, there is only one god, have no idols, keep the sabbath, don't kill or steal, don't sin lest you be punished, don't eat certain foods or wear certain fabrics or plant certain crops, how to deal with lepers and slaves, etc.. This is all very simple stuff and requires no divine inspiration or guidance to understand. If you have any different read on it than that, for example that the book is more than that, then it's you saying the apple is blue. It's not.

You are free to not reply but the Bible is the authority and the Church is the pillar and support of the Truth.

The church and Bible have no non-trivial truths, just claims that cannot be demonstrated to be correct. I know, because I've read it a few times. I also know because when I ask believers what some of these truths are, all I get are crickets or unsupported beliefs, which don't rise to my standard of what constitutes truth.

The Bible has no authority except with volunteers like you, who, like me, are free to revoke that authority. Sorry, but if you're going to express your beliefs as fact rather than things believed by faith, then you invite rebuttal whenever you are deemed incorrect.

 

[ElishaElijah]

That's how I feel about people who think they know a god because they read a book and follow some rules, but they really don't. They've been taught something false and believed it.

Me too, I agree with that, if God hasn’t shown Himself to a person and given them His Spirit then it’s all just dead religion. Also goes for any person who doesn’t know God or been born again saying to someone who has that it’s not real or their is no God.

 

[ElishaElijah]

No, that's you who doesn't know what a Christian is. Your definition doesn't include many people that are and were Christians, so it is inadequate as a definition.

I got the definition from Jesus Christ, He gave me the definition, it’s written in the Bible.

 

[ElishaElijah]

That's how I feel about people who think they know a god because they read a book and follow some rules, but they really don't. They've been taught something false and believed it.


No, that's you who doesn't know what a Christian is. Your definition doesn't include many people that are and were Christians, so it is inadequate as a definition.



But you're the guy calling the apple blue.

I can tell you what the Bible says. I can tell you what any book written in my native language means except some technical books that use professional jargon or advanced mathematics. There is this myth that the scriptures are inscrutable to the casual reader which serves the needs of people who want to use them to support any position whatsoever. They come up with some doctrine, give their scriptural defense, and then deal with the rebuttal of skeptics by simply trying to disqualify their understanding of scripture using this myth.

But this is a simple book. It was an oral tradition before being written, told to children as well as their parents as instruction on what to believe and what to do. God made the world as an act of will in six days and then rested for one, there is only one god, have no idols, keep the sabbath, don't kill or steal, don't sin lest you be punished, don't eat certain foods or wear certain fabrics or plant certain crops, how to deal with lepers and slaves, etc.. This is all very simple stuff and requires no divine inspiration or guidance to understand. If you have any different read on it than that, for example that the book is more than that, then it's you saying the apple is blue. It's not.



The church and Bible have no non-trivial truths, just claims that cannot be demonstrated to be correct. I know, because I've read it a few times. I also know because when I ask believers what some of these truths are, all I get are crickets or unsupported beliefs, which don't rise to my standard of what constitutes truth.

The Bible has no authority except with volunteers like you, who, like me, are free to revoke that authority. Sorry, but if you're going to express your beliefs as fact rather than things believed by faith, then you invite rebuttal whenever you are deemed incorrect.

Where is any rebuttal of biblical teaching other than you saying you believe something else? Go ahead, open up the Bible and tell me where I’m in error.

 

[joelr]

You say you know what it says, but don’t actually say what it says. All you communicate is you don’t believe it. I already know that and not the point.

I am familiar with Acts. Let's examine what it says and WHERE IT CAME FROM, It's a re-write of several sources, all fiction. Several scholars have worked on this, Purvoe, Thomas Brodie, Dennis MacDonald , Burton Mack ...
Acts is doing a rewrite of the Elijah-Elisha narrative in some of the Old Testament (OT) texts of Kings, although placing Paul and Jesus in the main roles instead, which obviously would have been a literary source of historical fiction.
Dennis MacDonald has shown that Luke also reworked fictional tales written by Homer, replacing the characters and some of the outcomes as needed to suit his literary purposes. MacDonald informs us in his The Shipwrecks of Odysseus and Paul (New Testament Studies, 45, pp. 88-107) that:

“The shipwrecks of Odysseus and Paul share nautical images and vocabulary, the appearance of a goddess or angel assuring safety, the riding of planks, the arrival of the hero on an island among hospitable strangers, the mistaking of the hero as a god, and the sending of him on his way [in a new ship].“
Luke borrows other ideas and details from famous shipwreck narratives including those found in Jonah, the Odyssey, and the Aeneid. In fact, Acts rewrites Homer a number of other times. Paul’s resurrection of the fallen Eutychus was based on the fallen Elpenor. The visions of Cornelius and Peter were constructed from a similar narrative that was written about Agamemnon. Paul’s farewell at Miletus was made from Hector’s farewell to Andromache. The lottery of Matthias we hear about was built off of the lottery of Ajax. Even Peter’s escape from prison was lifted from Priam’s escape from Achilles. There are other literary sources besides Homer that the author of Acts used as well. For example, the prison breaks in Acts share several themes with the famously miraculous prison breaks found in the Bacchae of Euripedes such as the miraculous unlocking of chains and being able to escape due to an earthquake (compare Acts 12.6-7 and 16.26 to Bacchae pp. 440-49, 585-94).
The source that Acts seems to use more than any other is the Septuagint. MacDonald has shown that the overall structure of the Peter and Cornelius story is based on writings from Homer, the scholar Randel Helms has shown that other elements were in fact borrowed from the book of Ezekiel in the OT, thus merging both story models into a single one. For example, both Peter and Ezekiel see the heavens open up (Acts 10.11; Ezek. 1.1), both of them are commanded to eat something in their vision (Acts 10.13; Ezek. 2.9), both respond to God twice by saying “By no means, Lord!” using the exact same Greek phrase (Acts 10.14, 11.8; Ezek. 4.14, 20.49), both are asked to eat unclean food, and finally both protest saying that they have never eaten anything unclean before (Acts 10.14; Ezek. 4.14).
That is just a few examples. There are many more.

Such an obvious work of fiction is simply not historical. What it says cannot be used as history so the narrative doesn't matter.

 

[joelr]

I don’t have a problem with that but you have a big problem when it goes the other way, very inconsistent and dishonest.

You asked if Ehrman was in fact "born again" as if saying those words has some special magic power? He was. Now he is not. He came to his senses and realized his beliefs were not actually justified.
You are now making claims I'm inconsistent and dishonest but not giving examples or explaining your words? This is just random ad-hom you seemed to finally had to resort to because you have no argument? As usual you will have no evidence.

And as usual I simply report facts from historical and archaeological scholarship and the believer frames this as dishonest and whatever other names you feel like using. The things you believe are made up stories. There is evidence of this, lots of evidence. So I'm talking about it.

You still haven't responded, just one time, to the dozens of points I've made about how every single thing you say can also be said about any other religion?

You can’t have it both ways. Be a man then and just say, you will not have Jesus Christ as your Lord. Leave it at that instead of all this other stuff.

Oh now you want to censor people? Even worse on a debate forum?? You don't like the fact that I'm speaking historical truths backed up by all scholarship so your answer is to ask me to stop speaking. Hmmmm, could that be this is exactly what it looks like when one tries to promote false beliefs and they get called out? Or were you planning to just evangelize with anecdotal evidence and think that would impress people?
Just like if you were on a debate board and people were saying Islam is the true religion and only Allah is the true God, you may want to debunk those claims. But when it's your religion then you don't want such talk. Super hypocrite.
I cannot have JC as Lord because he's a mythical character based on Greek religion. There is no JC to have as lord?

The problem is that people are saying they were a Christian but are no longer, when I hear their story and testimony it says to me that they thought they were but really weren’t, they just took a bath and followed some rules, were taught something false.

Nope. What it says is that you know if you admit actual Christians left the religion it would prove your theory wrong. But no one buys the idea that you know what was in Ehrmans head when he was a Christian. I had all the experiences as well. Felt like a deity was listening to me. So did my GF in Islam and Hinduism. This is pure psychology. In fact the people in the Heavens Gate cult were so sure of the theology presented to them they all committed suicide to get their spirit to the next level.

But you cannot say Ehrman was not born again. He says he was. He went to church daily and had a relationship with Jesus. Then he realized it was all in his imagination. Ehrman truly believed he was a born again fundamentalist. You mean to tell me your God is so weak that a person can fully believe they are doing everything correct, be 100% committed and it still doesn't work?
You also cannot demonstrate this is all just in your mind. I mean, you could, but I already know you will have excuses all lined up.
All you would need to do is get some information from a deity you couldn't get otherwise. I have a 8 digit number from pi. Tell me what town I'm in?
But I already know all the apologetics that believers come up with as reasons why they can't "test God". Of course, it's really because you are not actually speaking to any God and your imagination and emotions cannot give you real outside information.


Also as Sheldon is pointing out. you are dramatically leaning on the no true Scotsman fallacy, hard. No one is convinced by it and it's making your argument look really shallow.

 

[samtonga43]

I am familiar with Acts. Let's examine what it says and WHERE IT CAME FROM, It's a re-write of several sources, all fiction. Several scholars have worked on this, Purvoe, Thomas Brodie, Dennis MacDonald , Burton Mack ...
Acts is doing a rewrite of the Elijah-Elisha narrative in some of the Old Testament (OT) texts of Kings, although placing Paul and Jesus in the main roles instead, which obviously would have been a literary source of historical fiction.
Dennis MacDonald has shown that Luke also reworked fictional tales written by Homer, replacing the characters and some of the outcomes as needed to suit his literary purposes. MacDonald informs us in his The Shipwrecks of Odysseus and Paul (New Testament Studies, 45, pp. 88-107) that:

You rely on the Genetic fallacy a lot, joelr

Your logical fallacy is genetic

 

[joelr]

There are variations and a lot of freedom in many areas of life for example, eating, drinking, what you wear, when we pray, how we pray, fasting etc.
But on some matters of faith there is no compromising like the authority of Scripture and the foundations of our faith:
“Therefore, let us leave the elementary teaching about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works, faith in God, teaching about ritual washings, laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭6:1-2‬ ‭CSB‬‬

Yup and the authority of the scriptures from Allah are also just as clear.Actually way clearer, they take the authority of scripture very seriously. And yet it's - IT'S TRUE BECAUSE IT SAYS SO!!!!!!!!!! Billions of people believe this, have personal relationships, cite hundreds of Islamic scholars and by 2050 will outnumber Christians in the U.S.

Yet, it's still fiction.


First: Evidence from the Quran

There are tens of verses in the Quran that deal—explicitly and/or implicitly—with this issue in terms of defining the role of the Messenger,

commanding Muslims to obey him,

prohibiting them from disobeying him,

ordering them to submit to his command and follow his example. Here are some of those verses, no comments provided here for the sake of brevity and because most of these verses have previously been discussed:

• “…And whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger will be admitted by Him to gardens [in Paradise] under which rivers flow, abiding eternally therein; and that is the great attainment.And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger and transgresses His limits – He will put him into the Fire to abide eternally therein, and he will have a humiliating punishment.” [Quran 4: 13-14]
• “O you who have believed, obey Allah and His Messenger and do not turn from him while you hear [his order].”[Quran 8:20]
• “O you who have believed, respond to Allah and to the Messenger when he calls you to that which gives you life...” [Quran 8: 24]
• “He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah; but those who turn away—We have not sent you over them as a guardian.” [Quran 4: 80]
• “Say, ‘Obey Allah and the Messenger.’ But if they turn away – then indeed, Allah does not like the disbelievers.” [Quran 3:32]
• “And obey Allah and the Messenger that you may obtain mercy.”[Quran 3: 132]
• “…And whatever the Messenger has given you – take; and what he has forbidden you – refrain from…” [Quran 59: 7]
• “O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.” [Quran 4: 59]
• “O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and do not invalidate your deeds.”[Quran 47: 33]
• “...So let those beware who dissent from the Prophet’s order, lest fitnah strike them or a painful punishment.” [Quran 24: 63]
• “And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger and transgresses His limits – He will put him into the Fire to abide eternally therein, and he will have a humiliating punishment.”[Quran 4: 14]
• “There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.” [Quran 33: 21]
• “Certainly did Allah confer [great] favor upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error.” [Quran 3: 164]
• “We sent them] with clear proofs and written ordinances. And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought.” [Quran 16: 44]

More proof:
Second: Evidence from Authentic Hadeeth
The ahadeeth narrated from the Messenger of Allah

indicating Hujjiyyatus Sunnah are numerous, and scholars typically categorize them into sets giving evidence to the various aspects of the issue, like: that it is an obligation upon all Muslims to follow and live according to the Sunnah, that the Sunnah is also a revelation from Allah, that it has an authority similar to that of the Quran, that it legislates rulings and laws independently from the Quran, etc. The following set presents a collection of such ahadeeth.

Third: Evidence from Ijmaa
Ijmaa is the consensus or agreement of Muslims or Muslim scholars. And Muslims were in the past and are still in agreement today that the Sunnah has authority over Muslims such that they are obliged to follow and are prohibited from disregarding it. This fact was repeatedly stated and stressed by the major scholars throughout the history. Ibn Hazm stated that it is not known that any person, who may be called a scholar, has ever disputed the authority of the Sunnah. Imam Ibnul Qayyim stated that “Muslims are in consensus that anytime a Muslim recognizes a Sunnah in relation to any issue then he has no way but to accept it, practice it and implement it.”
Similarly, all major Muslim scholars have stated their consensus about the validity of Hujjiyyatus Sunnah and the necessity of following it for one’s faith to be valid, correct and authentic.
Fourth: Evidence from ‘Ismah

‘Ismah is the infallibility and the perfection of Muhammad

as a prophet, a caller to, and a deliverer of Allah's message.

The Sharee’ah (Islamic law) as well as the consensus of scholars clearly indicate the infallibility of not just Prophet Muhammad

but all of Allah's prophets and messengers, may Allah exalt their mention, they cannot and will not do anything that decrease from their perfect and honest delivery of their message or taint it.

And because of this ‘Ismah, Prophet Muhammad

was protected from and against hiding or doubting any part of it, secured from Satan's whispers and ticks, safe from mistakes and omissions in all that he said or did. He was trained to act and do as a prophet from Allah, the Almighty, should act and do. And his character was so ideal that he

had no equal even before receiving revelation from the Heavens to the extent that people of Makkah nicknamed him, ‘the trustworthy’. ‘Ismah was manifested in various ways.

For example, the miraculousness of the Quran—his message was an indicator of ‘Ismah. The clear challenge presented by its inimitability became the miracle which indicated that he

receives revelation from Allah and thus he

was not going to misrepresent His message or change it. At the same time, the Quran repeatedly stated that Muhammad is honest and truthful in conveying what Allah wanted him to deliver without any addition, decrease or change. Furthermore, some of the incidents which he

had received revelation about that he had to recite to and explain to the believers and thus all people to the end of time, were dealing with personal affairs, challenging others and provoking them, giving prophecies about the near future as well as others that he might have wanted not to deal with openly. But he did convey the message as he received it regardless what the content was. These incidents, when learned in detail, clearly show that Allah was monitoring what happens to the Prophet

and what he did.

Fifth: Unfeasibility of implementing the Quran

All Muslims know that without the Sunnah no one can worship Allah properly. And that all claims to ignore the Sunnah and rely solely on the Quran for being Muslims are misguided innovations because they disregard tens of Quranic instructions that direct Muslims to follow and obey the Sunnah. What is important to note here is that the Quran by itself is not enough to worship Allah as He desires us to do. Because as stated by many prominent scholars of Islam, “the Quran is in need of the Sunnah but the Sunnah is not in need of the Quran.”

This should be simple to appreciate if one thinks about the acts of worship Allah has made obligatory upon all Muslims. Consider the Prayer for example: would anyone be able to perform the Prayer relying on the Quran alone? Not really. The same applies to the rest of Allah's orders.

The Quran makes requirements of the Muslims then the Sunnah shows them how. This is Allah's plan which made the Sunnah part of His revelation and a complement to the Quran. This is how much authority the Sunnah has in Islam. Without it there can be no Islam or Muslims.

 

[joelr]

When someone reveals what in their heart, they just told me. I am judging just like you are, you are taking their word but don’t know what it means to be a Christian.
If you say you were a Christian you had to believe that God created everything according to Genesis, believed Jesus died for your sins and according to that faith you would’ve received eternal life through Jesus Christ have been born again of the Holy Spirit, you would’ve been changed and a new person, the old gone the new creation in Christ, then willingly enter the waters of baptism where you are buried with Christ in His death and raised a new person just like Jesus Christ was raised from the dead. You die to yourself and live for Jesus Christ.
That is who a Christian is.

Did it as a teenager. Was a new person. Spoke to deities daily. Felt an amazing transformation. Funny, my GF who was Muslim has an exactly similar story. This sounds familiar......

Doesn't. make. it. real.

Becoming a Muslim

Muslim in prayer inside the Sehzade mosque, Istanbul, Turkey©
Becoming a Muslim requires a very simple act, but the meaning behind it is very deep.

You have to believe that there is only one God, Allah, who created the entire universe, and that Muhammad (peace be upon him) is his final messenger on earth.

If you recite this, with total sincerity, in front of two witnesses, you have become a Muslim. It really is as simple as that.

Muslims call this recitation the Shahadah, and refer to it as the first Pillar of Islam.

And if you become a Muslim by converting (some Muslims would say "reverting") to Islam your fellow Muslims will accept you as if you had been born a Muslim.

Submitting to God
Becoming a Muslim takes you into a new world.

It's a world in which you are intensely aware of your relationship with Allah, and aware that everything in the world exists because Allah chose that it should.

This gives life a whole new meaning, it lifts many responsibilities, and replaces them with the single aim of living life in the way that Allah wants you to live it.

So when you become a Muslim you have to live Allah's way. Every moment of your life has to follow Allah's will. Every choice you make must be the choice that would please Allah.

This may sound pretty constricting to people brought up in cultures that put more emphasis on the individual and what they want. A Muslim would disagree.


Part of the family

Muslims think of themselves as members of one family, called the Ummah. It's a family of all Muslims, and not just of all Muslims around the world, but of all Muslims who ever existed.

Constantly in touch with Allah
Once a Muslim has accepted Allah as the one and only God, they have to establish a constant link with God in their everyday lives - prayer is perhaps the best way to do that, and prayer is the second Pillar of Islam.

If it's possible, a Muslim should pray five times a day, at set times, and facing Mecca. You can pray almost anywhere.

In mosques men and women pray separately; in some mosques this is done with the men at the front and the women behind, in other mosques there are separate rooms for men and women.


Zakat, and it's the third pillar of Islam.

It's not a religious tax, as some people (not Muslims) say; it's an act of worship, and it's something that pleases God: in fact in the Qur'an you'll find that prayer and zakat are frequently spoken of together.

Zakat is an act of worship that goes directly to making the world a better place for people who are up against it.

Paying Zakat also purifies the 97.5% of your wealth that remains, and you can use this as you wish with clear heart. You can use some of it for gifts to charity, but such spontaneous charity is called sadaqah, not Zakat.

Cheating on zakat
Don't ever think of fiddling this calculation in order to pay less.

This isn't like cheating on your income tax, it's cheating on your relationship with God, and you and God will both know about it.

It would be like saying your prayers without meaning them. Or saying your prayers and then doing bad deeds.

Cheating God never, ever works. Not just because all good deeds and bad deeds are assessed at the Day of Judgement, but also because if you cheat on your faith you cheat yourself of everything that being a good Muslim means.

Being poor and hungry
If you're a Muslim it's not enough just to give money for the poor; you're expected to understand what it feels like to be poor and hungry, and to go without food and drink.

So once a year, for a month called Ramadan, all Muslims fast from first light until sunset; abstaining from food, drink, sex, and smoking.

This fasting not only helps a Muslim understand the needy, it's a sort of ritual purification of themselves.

Giving things up
It's not just at Ramadan that Muslims abstain. When you become a Muslim you have to give up certain things like alcohol - khamr - and, of course, drugs for ever.

And Muslims don't go to places where alcohol is served - so if you want to discuss Islam with a Muslim friend, the pub is not the place to suggest.

You'll find that Muslims manage to have just as good a time without them as most people do with them - In fact they have a much better time.

Tobacco isn't banned in the Qur'an, but the Qur'anic principles suggest that smoking is not a good thing.

 

[joelr]

Where is any rebuttal of biblical teaching other than you saying you believe something else? Go ahead, open up the Bible and tell me where I’m in error.

All of the supernatural stories, Gods, blood sacrifice, all fiction. Doesn't mean that some good virtues are taught in scripture? Although there still are contradictions. Hundreds. Do humans have free will? How should non-believers be treated? Who saw the post resurrection Jesus first?

Do we need rebuttal of Islamic teaching to know it's false? No. So this proves nothing?

 

[ElishaElijah]

You asked if Ehrman was in fact "born again" as if saying those words has some special magic power? He was. Now he is not. He came to his senses and realized his beliefs were not actually justified.
You are now making claims I'm inconsistent and dishonest but not giving examples or explaining your words? This is just random ad-hom you seemed to finally had to resort to because you have no argument? As usual you will have no evidence.

And as usual I simply report facts from historical and archaeological scholarship and the believer frames this as dishonest and whatever other names you feel like using. The things you believe are made up stories. There is evidence of this, lots of evidence. So I'm talking about it.

You still haven't responded, just one time, to the dozens of points I've made about how every single thing you say can also be said about any other religion?



Oh now you want to censor people? Even worse on a debate forum?? You don't like the fact that I'm speaking historical truths backed up by all scholarship so your answer is to ask me to stop speaking. Hmmmm, could that be this is exactly what it looks like when one tries to promote false beliefs and they get called out? Or were you planning to just evangelize with anecdotal evidence and think that would impress people?
Just like if you were on a debate board and people were saying Islam is the true religion and only Allah is the true God, you may want to debunk those claims. But when it's your religion then you don't want such talk. Super hypocrite.
I cannot have JC as Lord because he's a mythical character based on Greek religion. There is no JC to have as lord?




Nope. What it says is that you know if you admit actual Christians left the religion it would prove your theory wrong. But no one buys the idea that you know what was in Ehrmans head when he was a Christian. I had all the experiences as well. Felt like a deity was listening to me. So did my GF in Islam and Hinduism. This is pure psychology. In fact the people in the Heavens Gate cult were so sure of the theology presented to them they all committed suicide to get their spirit to the next level.

But you cannot say Ehrman was not born again. He says he was. He went to church daily and had a relationship with Jesus. Then he realized it was all in his imagination. Ehrman truly believed he was a born again fundamentalist. You mean to tell me your God is so weak that a person can fully believe they are doing everything correct, be 100% committed and it still doesn't work?
You also cannot demonstrate this is all just in your mind. I mean, you could, but I already know you will have excuses all lined up.
All you would need to do is get some information from a deity you couldn't get otherwise. I have a 8 digit number from pi. Tell me what town I'm in?
But I already know all the apologetics that believers come up with as reasons why they can't "test God". Of course, it's really because you are not actually speaking to any God and your imagination and emotions cannot give you real outside information.


Also as Sheldon is pointing out. you are dramatically leaning on the no true Scotsman fallacy, hard. No one is convinced by it and it's making your argument look really shallow.

You missed the whole point, listen closely and skip your diatribe that is off target…
There are people who have tasted of the Lord and may have been true Christians, born again and left who would be apostates. I don’t have a problem at all acknowledging that, these people would not and could not now say Jesus Christ is a myth but they would say I will not have Jesus rule over me and they have turned away to live for themselves.
I have not heard on this forum any evidence from skeptics or atheists who say they were a Christian that in fact, they meet the criteria of the Bible that they were actually born again by their testimonies.
Then on the other hand you take the testimonies of people like Ehrman by what they say without any objective evidence. How do you know he was born again, only God can do that work, so are you acknowledging this is evidence for God now? Good, I’m glad and you don’t need any objective evidence for him being born again in this case.
Now getting back to “What the Bible teaches”, see you really don’t know, you only present one side, a view about how you think the Bible originated but have no clue what it says and means or teaches. Constantly misinterpreting the Bible.

“For it is impossible to renew to repentance those who were once enlightened, who tasted the heavenly gift, who shared in the Holy Spirit, who tasted God’s good word and the powers of the coming age, and who have fallen away. This is because, to their own harm, they are recrucifying the Son of God and holding him up to contempt. For the ground that drinks the rain that often falls on it and that produces vegetation useful to those for whom it is cultivated receives a blessing from God. But if it produces thorns and thistles, it is worthless and about to be cursed, and at the end will be burned.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭6:4-8‬ ‭CSB‬‬

This is about people who have been a Christian and are not, the people on this forum so far have not demonstrated this, but only have gone to a church, forced, coerced religious activities.

 

[joelr]

You rely on the Genetic fallacy a lot, joelr

Your logical fallacy is genetic

Improper use of the term. I'm not judging it a good work or a bad work. It's great fiction actually. The Greek school taught writers how to write excellent fictive biographies and excellent stories. In part because they take quality fiction and they re-write those stories and combine them.
We see this here to such a high degree in order for Acts to be any kind of history, one would have to assume that all of these parallels are merely historical coincidences which is orders of magnitude less probable than that they are simply inventions that were intentionally created to reflect one another.
Acts also helps demonstrate Jesus was not historical and just a literary creation.

So this is not an example of genetic fallacy. If a writer makes the claim that West Side Story is a re-working of Romeo and Juliet they are not using a fallacy but reporting facts.
We have a peer-reviewed book and several peer-reviewed papers on Acts demonstrating it's a clever work of fiction.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Did it as a teenager. Was a new person. Spoke to deities daily. Felt an amazing transformation. Funny, my GF who was Muslim has an exactly similar story. This sounds familiar.....

You know demons are real and counterfeit what God does?
Jesus said He is the Way, the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but by Him. He rose from the dead, He gives His Spirit as proof and a person is born again and enlightened. A Muslim isn’t born again.
“For if a person comes and preaches another Jesus, whom we did not preach, or you receive a different spirit, which you had not received, or a different gospel, which you had not accepted, you put up with it splendidly!”
‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭11:4‬ ‭CSB‬‬

People can receive a different spirit

“And no wonder! For Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no great surprise if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will be according to their works.”
‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭11:14-15‬ ‭CSB‬‬

 

[joelr]

You missed the whole point, listen closely and skip your diatribe that is off target…
There are people who have tasted of the Lord and may have been true Christians, born again and left who would be apostates. I don’t have a problem at all acknowledging that, these people would not and could not now say Jesus Christ is a myth but they would say I will not have Jesus rule over me and they have turned away to live for themselves.
I have not heard on this forum any evidence from skeptics or atheists who say they were a Christian that in fact, they meet the criteria of the Bible that they were actually born again by their testimonies.

That's funny. You are now just doubling down on the ridiculous fallacy that you have already been exposed of several times. This just makes it way worse. Your idea that a true Christian could never be a non-believer is absolute nonsense and isn't even an apologetic. There are thousands of priests and pastors like Ryan J. Bell who was a conservative traditional Adventist Pastor who became non-believers when they realized what they believed was not real. I know I was a serious Christian, studies scripture, hermeneutics, apologist rhetoric (C.S. Lewis, Licona...), theology, particulary the founding fathers, Augustine, Aquinas, Descartes and others. Your juvenile insistence on "oh God touched me so I'm a "real" Christian and I say I'm "born again" and placing yourself as the absolute master of who is and isn't Christian is one of the worst lines of debate I've ever seen on this forum.
You don't know the experiences in others minds. Your apologetics isn't even used by actual apologists. They wouldn't say something so ridiculous.
People believe the religion and get involved with ALL different sects. And people in ALL sects realize it's not actually real and leave.
Bart Ehrman was a Christian. I was a Christian. I do not care what some desperate random person failing at debating thinks about that.

Let's see what Christainity.org has to say?
"A Christian is someone who believes in Jesus Christ and follows his teachings. The Bible says ‘If anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation. The old has gone, the new has come.’ This means that when we become a Christian we may look the same on the outside, but something has forever changed on the inside. There are various metaphors to describe it – we have ‘changed country’, ‘come under new ownership’, or ‘been born again’. Christians believe that God sends his Holy Spirit to live within everyone at that moment."


There you go. I was Christian. Probably so was Bart Ehrman.
All that stuff about "a new life" and "changed on the inside", yup, that happens. Happens in Islam as well. Hmmm, guess why? Because when you think you have undergone a spiritual change your brain responds with all sorts of happy chemicals.
So you got nothing here.

Then on the other hand you take the testimonies of people like Ehrman by what they say without any objective evidence. How do you know he was born again, only God can do that work, so are you acknowledging this is evidence for God now? Good, I’m glad and you don’t need any objective evidence for him being born again in this case.

If a person claims they are born again that is the evidence. Gods are not real. If one thinks they are born again, that's all that is.

Now getting back to “What the Bible teaches”, see you really don’t know, you only present one side, a view about how you think the Bible originated but have no clue what it says and means or teaches. Constantly misinterpreting the Bible.

You haven't presented any evidence I have misinterpreting the Bible? You just make the claim?
So first, it isn't MY view on how the Bible originated. It's the vast consensus of historical and archaeological scholars. And the evidence, which can be seen, bears that out. Salvation is a Greek concept. Souls and heaven are also Greek. After the Greek occupation a new religion emerged with ALL Greek and Persian myths. That is a fact.

And again, I am familiar with the theology, probably far more than you. Especially theology and natural theology and then Hume's critique of it.
You think Bible class gives you some special insight to scripture? Yet you are also blindly unaware of what is happening in the scholarship of your own religion? Yet you still want to act like some judge and jury of who is Christian?

“For it is impossible to renew to repentance those who were once enlightened, who tasted the heavenly gift, who shared in the Holy Spirit, who tasted God’s good word and the powers of the coming age, and who have fallen away. This is because, to their own harm, they are recrucifying the Son of God and holding him up to contempt. For the ground that drinks the rain that often falls on it and that produces vegetation useful to those for whom it is cultivated receives a blessing from God. But if it produces thorns and thistles, it is worthless and about to be cursed, and at the end will be burned.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭6:4-8‬ ‭CSB‬‬

This is about people who have been a Christian and are not, the people on this forum so far have not demonstrated this, but only have gone to a church, forced, coerced religious activities.

Oopsy, you should not have posted that scripture. You have been making a claim that anyone who actually experienced God could never call Jesus a myth. Except here we have someone who - "were once enlightened, who tasted the heavenly gift, who shared in the Holy Spirit, who tasted God’s good word and the powers of the coming age,"........

And THEN ........ "and who have fallen away:!!!!!!!!!

So there it is, it's scriptural that a real Christian can leave the religion. HA!

All of this is nonsense. Every religion says these things. Islam, Hinduism, all of them. Once you experience this God blah, blah.,...They are stories and scripture written by people with zero evidence that any Gods or supernatural things really happened. The myths are taken from other nations and like Osirus, Jesus is not real. You are not even trying to produce evidence?

 

[ElishaElijah]

So there it is, it's scriptural that a real Christian can leave the religion. HA!

I never said a real Christian couldn’t leave the faith.
I said the people here on RF that said they were Christians and now are not haven’t demonstrated they were ever Christians.
Problem is you refuse to listen or comprehend what people are saying.

 

[ElishaElijah]

You haven't presented any evidence I have misinterpreting the Bible

Yes I have, Jesus was not created and there is no dual creation theory. That’s not what the Bible teaches.

 

[joelr]

You know demons are real and counterfeit what God does? ‬‬

No, demons are fiction. The Christian version of Satan was that he was an agent of God, doing Yahwehs bidding. The 2nd Temple Period is when the Hebrews were exposed to the God vs Devil kind of Satan and they took that version. Revelations is also originally a Persian myth.


During the Second Temple Period, when Jews were living in the Achaemenid Empire, Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, the religion of the Achaemenids.[26][8][27] Jewish conceptions of Satan were impacted by Angra Mainyu,

The idea of Satan as an opponent of God and a purely evil figure seems to have taken root in Jewish pseudepigrapha during the Second Temple Period,[30] particularly in the apocalypses.


It wasn't until more recent centuries that Satan was made more powerful and beliefs that he possessed people and all that started. So that isn't even Biblical?
During the Early Modern Period, Christians gradually began to regard Satan as increasingly powerful[145] and the fear of Satan's power became a dominant aspect of the worldview of Christians across Europe.[136][138] During the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther taught that, rather than trying to argue with Satan, Christians should avoid temptation altogether by seeking out pleasant company;[148] Luther especially recommended music as a safeguard against temptation, since the Devil "cannot endure gaiety."[148] John Calvin repeated a maxim from Saint Augustine that "Man is like a horse, with either God or the devil as rider."[149]

Jesus said He is the Way, the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but by Him. He rose from the dead, He gives His Spirit as proof and a person is born again and enlightened. A Muslim isn’t born again.‬‬

No, that's what Matthew wrote in a fictive savior demigod biography. It isn't real. Muslims don;t have to be "born again" because their scripture doesn't call for it. An angel Gabrielle visited Muhammad and said the Christians and Jews screwed up my message. Please fix it and gave new updates.
Their evidence is as good as yours.
Shoe is on the other foot now?

Muslims no longer need to be born again, God gave updates. Guess what - it's true because it says so! That's your logic all day!

“For if a person comes and preaches another Jesus, whom we did not preach, or you receive a different spirit, which you had not received, or a different gospel, which you had not accepted, you put up with it splendidly!”
‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭11:4‬ ‭CSB‬‬

People can receive a different spirit

“And no wonder! For Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no great surprise if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will be according to their works.”
‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭11:14-15‬ ‭CSB‬‬

HA HA! Now you like logic? Just like I am demonstrating the Bible is a collection of Greek and Persian myths and likely to be fiction, NOW upon hearing about Islam you want to show verses that might suggest it's also fiction. Sorry doesn't work that way with apologetics. They don't do common sense.
They have all sorts of writings from Allah about how the true message was corrupted. Including the "Jesus is God". Nope, Jesus was just a human prophet according to Allah and Jesus never said what Matthew claims!
See how religions twist truth. Yours is the same. You are getting a dose of your own medicine!



"I have a friend who grew up in a Bible-believing church that taught the Scriptures well. He took full advantage of the training opportunities offered to him. After working as a doctor for some time, he completed a degree in theology at an excellent theological college. His first ministry position was on a university campus where he met an 18-year-old first-year Muslim student. The young Muslim brought up biblical textual criticism to show the corruption of the Bible, challenged my friend about the Christian relationship to the Old Testament, illustrated how Paul had corrupted Christianity, and quoted the Bible at length. My friend wrote to me and said:

The Muslim student was very articulate (for a first year) and pushed me just as hard intellectually as I pushed him. It made me realize that if I was finding this difficult, many of our students would struggle too. It made me realize how ill-equipped theological college left me for engaging with Islam.


It’s a case of either/or. Either the New Testament account of Jesus is true or Muhammad’s account is true. Since they contradict each other, they both can’t be true.

In the gospel accounts, Jesus is rather insistent that he is the Son of God, and the Koran is rather insistent that he is not. Assuming that you know of the many instances in the gospels where Jesus asserts his divinity, here are some Koranic passages that say the opposite:


God is but one God. God forbid that he should have a son! (4: 173, trans Dawood).
The Messiah, the Son of Mary, was no more than an apostle (5:75, Dawood).

Christians call Christ the Son of Allah…. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth! (9:30, trans Yusuf Ali).

They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of the three in a Trinity (5:73, Yusuf Ali).

Ralph Sidway, the author of a recent piece on the “same God” question, puts the either/or nature of the choice in perspective:

Based on these brief examples alone, Christianity and Islam cannot both be from the same source which is what the Same God Question ultimately boils down to. If we treat each truth claim with respect, that each faith springs from a self-revelation of God, then it is clear the Allah of Islam is directly, and in a specific, vigorous manner, opposed to the revelation from the Christian God. And Jesus’ own emphatic testimony about himself excludes any alternate revelation concerning the nature of God.

So the author of the Koran unambiguously rejects the Christian belief in the Trinity. Moreover, he declares that a “grievous penalty will befall” those who persist in saying that “Allah is one of three” (5: 73). As Sidway puts it, “Allah is so vehement in these condemnations of Christian dogma that it amounts to what I term a ‘Theological Jihad’.”




Islam has endless apologetics that your scripture isn't talking about Muhammad. I don't care because it's all fake. But just like you, they don't do reason, facts, and empirical evidence. They do" the book says so".