• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

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

Sgt. Pepper

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
SkepticThinker said:
That's a yes then. God is to blame for atheists.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that God (assuming that he exists) is responsible for not only atheists but also for the dissension and division that exist within Christianity. The bickering and backbiting among Christians are as old as Christianity itself (1 Corinthians 1:10–17). According to the Bible, God is omniscient (Psalm 139:1–6; Isaiah 46:9–10; 1 John 3:20), omnipotent (Psalm 147:5; Job 42:2; Daniel 2:21), and omnipresent (Psalm 139:7–10; Isaiah 40:12; Colossians 1:17).

I would have thought that a God like that would have done a much better job of inspiring the Bible to be understandable and accepted by his followers, but that is obviously not the case with the God of the Bible. In my opinion, that's why there are multiple versions of the Bible (Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and Protestant, with a plethora of varying English versions). It stands to reason that God's failure to be more clear about what the Bible actually teaches is why Christianity is divided into Roman Catholics, Messianic Judaism, Anglicans, Orthodox (Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox), and a vast smorgasbord of Protestants: Baptist (First Baptist, Second Baptist, Southern Baptist, Reformed Baptist, Primitive Baptist, Anabaptist, Freewill Baptist), Methodist, Lutheran, Pentecostal, Mennonite, Mormon, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventist, The Assemblies of God, Church of Christ, Church of God, Church of the Nazarene, and hundreds of other Protestant churches. It's clear that Christians are divided and separate themselves into different churches and follow various doctrines and biblical interpretations, which has happened in both historical and contemporary Christianity.

If you ask a diverse group of Christians the same theological question, such as asking them about the afterlife, you'll get different answers. However, they will all cite the Bible in an attempt to defend their answers, but their answers are contradictory. They even argue about whether Jesus' mother remained a virgin after his birth. Ironically, they all believe that they are correct about their beliefs and everyone else (including other Christians) is wrong about theirs, but then they have the audacity to claim that the Bible is the word of God and Christianity is the only true religion in the world. In my opinion, there's no reason to believe any of them. I think it's ridiculous for any Christian to claim that their biblical interpretation and theology are correct while insisting that other Christians are wrong, that the Bible is divinely inspired, and that Christianity is the only true religion in the world. It is quite ironic, in my opinion, that Christians seem to expect unbelievers to accept the Bible as divinely inspired and the final authority on moral issues, yet they can't agree on what it says.
 
Last edited:
Muffled

Muffled

Jesus in me
SkepticThinker said:
You're right about there being no evidence of a global flood.

But perhaps you can explain how the story in the Bible makes any kind of sense at all, if it wasn't the global flood it is clearly described as.
Click to expand...
I believe you are so clearly wrong in your interpretation.

I believe it makes a lot of sense that a flood that large would kill of the majority of people living in that location but an ark would float.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Muffled said:
I believe you are so clearly wrong in your interpretation.

I believe it makes a lot of sense that a flood that large would kill of the majority of people living in that location but an ark would float.
Click to expand...
I see. It appears that you believe in a local flood. How would that have accomplished God's goals?
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
leroy said:
Yes I have been using your dishonest tactics for a few minutes and I already feel bad.

How do you manage to keep that behavior for so many years?
Click to expand...
But I do not use those techniques. You wanted something for free. I would not give you what you wanted for free. You got angry and have been acting rather childishly since.

Now that I am willing to give you something for free you pout because it is not what you wanted earlier.

But then you do know that the flood story is a myth. That is why you really do not want information about it for free.
 
leroy

leroy

Well-Known Member
Subduction Zone said:
But I do not use those techniques. You wanted something for free. I would not give you what you wanted for free. You got angry and have been acting rather childishly since.
Click to expand...

Yes, these are your techniques

1 you make a claim

2 I ask you to support it

3 you say that you already did

4 I ask, where? In what post.

5 you refuse to provide a link, or the number of the post, or the date etc. where you support it


Subduction Zone said:
Now that I am willing to give you something for free you pout because it is not what you wanted earlier.

But then you do know that the flood story is a myth. That is why you really do not want information about it for free.
Click to expand...
I don’t have a strong view on the flood story………. Íll say that it is based on a true event (a local flood) that was then exaggerated for a theological purpose……… but I am far from putting my money on this particular view.

see how easy it is to expalin a view clearly and unabigously?
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
leroy said:
Yes, these are your techniques

1 you make a claim

2 I ask you to support it

3 you say that you already did

4 I ask, where? In what post.

5 you refuse to provide a link, or the number of the post, or the date etc. where you support it



I don’t have a strong view on the flood story………. Íll say that it is based on a true event (a local flood) that was then exaggerated for a theological purpose……… but I am far from putting my money on this particular view.

see how easy it is to expalin a view clearly and unabigously?
Click to expand...
More false claims where you ignore your past guilt. To many people know how you debate. To be honest you would have had to include references to what you have done in the past.

You were just required to admit something that everyone knew already. Something that your demand confirmed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top