panelarrow

Atheist Tuesday: Christmas Liars

| 108 Comments

Since it’s Christmas time again, it’s time to re-post what will soon become an annual favorite for Atheist Tuesday! (This was dated from December 7 of last year but the ultimate conclusions presented at the end of this article are still current.)

The more aggressive atheist types are mounting a full-on offensive against one of Christianity’s more cherished celebrations: Christmas.

Essentially, by stating that what we believe is a myth, they are saying that we follow a lie. But who are the liars, really?

Let’s see who the real liars are according to the Bible:

Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also. (1 John 2: 22-23)

I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. (2 John 7)

So, given this truth, I have a new name for the people who started this sad campaign against Christmas: Instead of  “American Atheists” how about…

…”AMERICAN ANTICHRISTS”?

(Because let’s face it, they are only against the Christian God.)


108 Comments

  1. Steve, plugging your ears won’t change the truth. Calling us names won’t change the truth. Though, personally, I don’t like this ad – it annoys me as much as, “Jesus is the reason for the season,” and for similar reasons. The “Good without God,” is better – it doesn’t try to be controversial and isn’t specific to Christianity.

    “…they are saying that we follow a lie.”

    Well, if we’re talking about evolution and the literal interpretation of Genesis, then, yes, you are following a lie. I truly don’t understand why you think Christianity can’t coexist with reality — but, I’m a heathen.

    “(Because let’s face it, they are only against the Christian God.)”

    Are you talking specifically about this group? Because, I’m pretty sure the atheists that post here will say that Wicca, Hinduism, Islam… well anything that claims some sort of deity or deities… is a myth.

  2. Steve wrote: “Because let’s face it, they are only against the Christian God.

    In a post talking about people being liars… you wrote this.

    Interesting.

    Steve, do you honestly believe this to be the truth? They are just as much against the Muslim god… the difference being that we don’t live in a country where around 75% of the people are Muslims.

    If we did, then you’d see “Allah is a myth” signs around Ramadan, or something like that.

  3. Oh, and by the way, in the Islamic holy book it says that worshipping anyone but Allah sends you to Hell.

    So… can’t say I’m shocked that the Christian holy book says that people who aren’t Christian are wrong.

    It’s kinda how holy books work, y’know?

  4. Oh yeah, and this one from Steve:

    Essentially, by stating that what we believe is a myth, they are saying that we follow a lie.

    Here’s what I was talking about in that other thread regarding how “conservative” religious people, as much as they talk about taking the Bible literally, sure don’t speak literally.

    The word “lie” has the connotation of intention. If the people who initiated all of this were convinced by it, and you were convinced by it, then there isn’t a “lie”. It’s only a lie if someone along the way supported it when they knew it was false.

    For example, if you ask a small child how far away the sun is, and he/she says “10 miles”… is the kid lying? I say “no”. Being wrong is not the same as lying; it’s only lying if you are intentionally saying something false, with the intention of your audience taking it as being true.

    Makes sense?

  5. It took me a minute to find an anti-muslim article. Right there on the front page.

    Isn’t one of your commandments against lying?

    We’ve explained it countless times why AMERICAN atheists focus more on Christianity. Your persecution complex doesn’t let you understand it. It’s not hard to convince a Christian majority that another religion is false. It’d be like going to the Middle East and railing against Christians. Not a hard sale.

  6. Did you all hear about the guy who threw a rock into the dog pack?

    No. What happened? Why would someone do that? Why would someone throw a rock at a dog?

  7. I’ll ask again.

    Steve, do you honestly believe that they’re only against “the Christian God”?

  8. This is nothing new there seems to be this kind of movement every year, and it is growing (sin continues to corrupt humanity). But God can use it for good so I really have no problem with the atheists’ doing this because it is their right, and it creates perfect opportunities to witness too others! I only wish the atheists’ would get louder so more people where I work, for example, would bring it up and then the conversation be turned into a gospel presentation! Merry Christmas to all and God bless!

  9. Good post Pastor Steve. ANY person that denies the existence of Jesus Christ is really an Antichrist. Although the Bible offers more descriptions about such persons, these couple of verses say a lot. Truly God’s Word is Holy and True.

  10. Oh Steve, tis the season to rile up the atheists apparently, sometimes I think you do atheist Tuesdays just to illicit a response from people.

    The War on Christmas is ridiculous and a silly concept, its a time of year where people should be coming together and getting together with family and friends, eat good food and give a gift or two, not griping about billboards that may offend people. Freedom of speech in America is and must remain absolute if we’re going to progress as a culture. As far as being antichrists, can’t argue with that passage in the Bible, its pretty cut and dry. That subject got me thinking about the Left Behind series, I’ve never read it but I’ve had a friend tell me about it. Steve do you believe the ‘anti-christ’ is/will be/ may be an actual person/ monster? Have you read the series?

  11. Did you read the last book in the series Kingdom Come?

  12. The guy who threw a rock into a dog pack was being a jerk to the dogs.

    Are you telling us you’re just a jerk chucking rocks at people, Steve? I notice you didn’t answer Nohm’s question. Probably because you know the truth now.

    And you act like you don’t know where the mean-spirited comments come from. Give me a break.

  13. vintango2k – Have you read the slacktivist? He’s a liberal evangelical and a good writer. Every Monday he takes on a chapter of the Left Behind series – the bad writing as well as the bad theology.

    “…sometimes I think you do atheist Tuesdays just to illicit a response from people.”

    I’m quite sure of that. Atheist Tuesday started because Garrett got under Steve’s skin — now Steve tries to get under our skin.

    • Not true that I’m trying to get under your skin, not true at all!

      This is a great way for you to see what the bible says about unbelievers, and it’s an opportunity for me to show the people who read this blog how to handle unbelievers using the Bible without compromising or giving up ground on the eternal truths.

      Really, in a strange sort of way, we’re friends, not enemies. You all have been visiting for over a year, so I know what you are about: unbelief. And I still like you! 🙂

      Proverbs says that wounds from a friend can be trusted. I would be remiss in my responsibility as a friend to give you the full council of God.

      Next week, you’ll read about grace and the amazing love and forgiveness God has to offer to you, albeit, with a little bit of an edge. 😉

  14. Does this mean you’ll address God’s torture of the Egyptian people for the sins of their Pharoh? Or the rape and murder of the Midianite people? (God approved, in fact he said take all the young girl virgins for themselves) I like you too Steve, I just hope someday my prayers will be answered and you’ll accept reason.

    @ Perdita

    I’ll check it out.

    • Vintango,

      Maybe someday I’ll address this.

      And by the way, according to the Scriptures, God doesn’t hear your prayers. In fact, if you are in an unredeemed state, they are an abomination to Him. Sorry.

      But you can change all that, you know….:)

  15. perdita wrote:

    vintango2k – Have you read the slacktivist? He’s a liberal evangelical and a good writer. Every Monday he takes on a chapter of the Left Behind series – the bad writing as well as the bad theology.

    I also heartily recommend this. If you do check it out, start from the veeeeery beginning.

    I think his writing is *excellent*.

  16. Answer the question, Steve: do admit to being in err concerning your comment about American Atheists?

  17. So all those people who claim revelation after prayer are… wrong or offending God? And are you claiming that ‘I’ (in that passive aggressive tone) am unredeemed, so my prayers are an abomination to God?

  18. So Steve still ignoring the ‘only against the Christian God’ bit?

    And you have to be a pretty ignorant Christian not to know that Christmas has nothing to do with the season.

    I bet Steve thinks that Christ died on Easter too.

  19. Garrett,

    I’m not in error. Check the context of the post.

    vintango,

    Psalm 34:15-16 “The eyes of the LORD are upon the righteous, and his ears are open unto their cry. The face of the LORD is against them that do evil, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth.”

    Psalm 66:18 “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me:”

    Proverbs 15:29 “The LORD is far from the wicked: but he heareth the prayer of the righteous.”

    Isaiah 59:1-2 “Behold, the LORD’S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.”

    1 Peter 3:12 “For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.”

  20. So your rebuttal is that I’m either evil or a sinner. You also suppose that because I have sinned I’m incapable of perceiving God? And while I grant you that by your standards I and the entire population of the human race of sinned against one of the many standards put forth by God it doesn’t dismiss what we know to be fact from what we know to be fantasy. I’m Catholic, I can go to a priest, confess my sins, pay my penance and be forgiven. Its what my religion has taught me just as your religion has taught you that the way to get into heaven is to get saved. Both are right according to their own doctrines but even if I were to get saved after a life of depravity, violence, and excess and I give my life to Jesus and beg for forgiveness when I pray to him, it still doesn’t change what we know about reality. I can accept Christ as Savior and still not believe in Genesis when I know that the Earth is round, revolves around the sun, doesn’t stand on pillars, and is BILLIONS of years old.

    • Remember, my belief is not based on church dogma, but on what the Bible says. Jesus said that a man cannot see the kingdom of God unless he is born again. Are you born again? I don’t think that you are. If not, then you are indeed in the category of “evil and a sinner.”

      I was that way too; I’m forgiven now. I’m still capable of sinning, though, (and I do) and certainly have the capacity for evil. I choose to follow what God says through His Word, which means I don’t want to sin or do evil because He saved me. Are you saved or are you holding onto being a Catholic? And yes, there are some who are “born-again” Catholics; that is, they are trusting only in Christ to be saved.

  21. If by being saved, I acknowledge that I’m imperfect and have sinned and will sin in the future and I ask forgiveness from Jesus Christ then yeah I guess I am saved. I’ve prayed to Jesus for forgiveness because its easy to do, private, and doesn’t cost me a thing to do except a little bit of time. But being born again doesn’t mean you have to stop thinking and asking questions, otherwise why did God even give us free will and intelligence in the first place? Furthermore, me ‘holding onto being a Catholic’ sounds an awful lot like you’re persecuting my religion Steve as opposed to ‘being saved’ sounds an awful lot like you’re condemning my religion. Dare I say… persecuting me?

    • Are you trusting in Christ and obeying what God says in his Word?

      If you are , then eventually you’ll see that the entire Bible is true, including Genesis. If you doubt that part, what else would you doubt? Pick and choose?

  22. You are still wrong, Steve. Nobody is disputing they are against the Christian God, just that they aren’t ONLY against your god.

    Yeah, we know you are very much capable of sinning. Lying is a bad habit of yours.

  23. I’ve been a huge slacktivist fan since 2007, when I stumbled on it while working a graveyard shift. What I really admire is that Fred Clark makes the Bible interesting, even for an atheist like me.

    I’ve mentioned before that Christians like Strve don’t seem to know the Bible very well. What I mean by that is that they mistake apologetics for study. They strip a Biblical quote of context try to shoehorn it into their pre-existing worldview.

    Steve quotes the first epistle of John to prove that 21st century atheists are anti-christs. O.K., it’s a novel piece of nonsense, I’ll give him that. But the authorship of that epistle is unknown. It wasn’t John the apostle, as 1st century Jewish fishermen were illiterate (less than 5% of 1st century Palestinian Jews could write, and they were to precious to work as fishermen). Also, there’s evidence that the epistle was written as a protest against a proto-gnostic called Cerinthus, who claimed Jesus was a spirit without a body. So ,in some respects, 1 John should be considered a political document rather than a religious document.

    Either way, I’m far from convinced that the author of John’s epistle had people like me in mind when he wrote that comment. Even if he did, I don’t know why the opinion if someone who has been dead for 2,000 years is worth more than the opinion of people who are alive today.

    • Mark,

      Yes, 1-3 John had Gnostics in view, but remember ANYONE who denies that Christ came in the flesh is an antichrist. So the shoe fits. And I put little stock in liberal scholars.

  24. Liberal scholars, or scholarship in general?

  25. But only conservative scholars produce good scholarship?

  26. So, what do those good, conservative scholars say about the whole Arminianism vs. Calvinism debate?

    Oh… I kid. 🙂

  27. Steve, if God had written the Bible himself then it would be perfect. As I’ve previously stated in posts, the Genesis accounts clash so heavily with established science (You don’t find little birdy and bunny skeletons in pre- Cambrian rock for example) that things like the Garden of Eden, the Great Flood, Tower of Babel couldn’t have happened in reality and to deny them is to deny the TRUTH of God’s creation. The God of the old testament, ie. the Jewish God, the God that the early Christian church chose to adopt as their own rather then separate as Marcian suggested, does things that are reprehensible by any sense of morality that we as humans possess. Is divine morality some how better or different than what we as lowly humans possess that is supposedly given to us by God?

    But you’ve hit upon what I finally figured the conversation would eventually become about, what you pick and choose to believe about the Bible itself. My answer is that the Bible was written by MEN, people who had a limited understanding of the universe, the Earth, biology, or SCIENCE for that matter. As a result their opinions and observations are flawed or biased, they believe in such absurd things like witchcraft and dragons. Things that we’ve endeavored to prove the existence of for centuries and have failed to do. (And not for a lack of trying, mind you.) What you pick and choose to believe about the Bible is really up to you, if the message makes sense, like Jesus’ message of peace and love, and you can relate to it and obey it then do that.

    But if you have to believe in a man living inside a fish for three days or the entire world being flooded without any evidence to show for it, then you really have to ask yourself that if God did all of these things to the primitive people of the Earth back then to prove his existence then why doesn’t he do them today, especially when so many people doubt his existence entirely or believe something differently? If the red sea was parted, if the oceans turned to blood, or even if a voice whispered the words, “I am He” into the ear of every single man, woman, or child on the planet, I can guarantee you there would be some serious conversion to Christianity going on worldwide, and these wouldn’t be false converts either, they would be people who now believe in the God of the Bible, unfailingly and are desperate to get saved. But we don’t have that, we have a very old text, that has been subject to change and numerous rewrites and translations over the centuries, and is subject to the bias and flaws of the men who wrote its gospels, if it was the unfailing word of God it wouldn’t contradict the ‘testament of God’s Creation’ ie. Reality at all, it would only reinforce it.

  28. Do you really Steve? Does this mean you’ll learn a little more about science and evolution?

  29. I understand too vintango2k where you are coming from. All of the subjects you raise vintango2k have good answers and evidence to back up the Bible, which I have presented in the past on this blog, I don’t know how many times. But one thing you said I would like to comment on,

    vintango2k said, “the Genesis accounts clash so heavily with established science.”

    That is the major problem, that the establishment has chosen to believe a lie (Darwinism) over the truth, because the established scientists hate God and love money (the evidence is so weak in comparison to the evidence for creation. The problem is so often people want 100% proof and there is not 100% proof for anything on this planet, except the evidence of the Holy Spirit, which can only be experienced through being born-again). That is really what it comes down too. This reminds me from studying when Galileo was persecuted in his day (17th century). Galileo was a disciple of Christ who was discovering important truths about the universe. It was not the church that first got angry at Galileo, it was the establishment of scientists of Galileo’s day that were not happy with him. So the establishment knew that if they were to come down on Galileo the best and hardest way was to get the “Catholic” church involved. At that time the establishment and the church agreed on many things scientifically, and they we‘re much more intertwined in that day (universities and the Catholic church). The establishment convinced the Catholic church that Galileo was going against what the Bible taught, but in reality Galileo was discovering what the Bible all ready declared (it makes sense from the reading of Scripture that the earth revolves around the sun as opposed to the sun going around the earth [everything revolves around the Son of God, Jesus Christ. I don‘t think it is a coincidence that the sun is called the sun. The spelling was just changed. Just a theory]. It was taught from Joshua 10:12-13 that the sun revolved around the earth, but that is not what Scripture is saying in that passage (that thinking was forced into the text). It is written from the perspective of men [the way in which the Bible is written]. We as people say, “the sun is rising” or “the sun is setting,” you never hear someone say, “the earth is moving towards evening or morning.”) The Bible is scientifically accurate at every point. The problem is we are fallible creatures reading a book that has been written by MEN but was not conceived by the mind of MEN, but by the Holy Spirit. Men were the pen and God was the hand using the pen to write the Bible.

    There is much more I could comment on like the Bible and how it has been accurately translated through history. The bottom line is with this issue, if the Bible is not accurate than the entire history departments at universities should be closed down because we can’t trust any primary sources from history. The Bible is the most accurate book on the planet. The amount of copies that exist testify to the Bible’s validity. More could be said of course. There are a lot of good books on this issue.

    P.S.—And please remember that though we broke the Ten Commandments (we‘ve all told a lie at some point, taken something that does not belong to us (a thief), taken God‘s name in vain (blasphemy) and/or hated someone and committed murder in our heart), Jesus Christ has paid the fine through his life’s blood. His death on the cross along with his resurrection sealed satan’s and death’s defeat. We are guilty in God’s courtroom (that’s hell for eternity), but Jesus settled the fine to give us heaven for eternity. Now God commands all people to repent and put their trust in Jesus to save them. Please do that today and God will grant you eternal life by forgiving your sins. Not because of me, not because of you, but because of Jesus and who He is. A God that gives us what we do not deserve. Please repent and trust Jesus. Today is the day of salvation.

  30. Thomas Moore wrote:

    That is the major problem, that the establishment has chosen to believe a lie (Darwinism) over the truth, because the established scientists hate God and love money

    Oh… geez.

    1. It’s hardly only “Darwinism” that clashes with Genesis. Cosmology, Geology, Physics, Chemistry, Anthropology… and so on, and so on. ALL of these different areas of science clash with Genesis.

    2. You pwn yourself when you call it “Darwinism”. Do we call the theory of gravity “Newtonism”? Do we call the theory of relativity “Einsteinism”? Do we call the germ theory of disease “Pasteurism”?

    Look. We don’t accept the theory of evolution because Darwin presented it. That dude was 150+ years ago. We accept it because THAT’S HOW THE MATH WORKS OUT.

    3. You say, “because the established scientists hate God and love money” Geeesh. What about all of the scientists who are Christians? How does one “hate God”? If they love money, you’d think they’d pick a far more lucrative line of work.

    Thomas also wrote: “The problem is so often people want 100% proof and there is not 100% proof for anything on this planet, except the evidence of the Holy Spirit, which can only be experienced through being born-again

    Who is asking for 100% proof? Not me. So please drop that silly straw-man. And this talk of “only be experienced through being born again”… as if no one here has gone down that path before.

    Thomas, you complain that others don’t pay attention to what you say, which I disagree because I definitely do, but it seems that YOU don’t pay attention to what other people say.

    Just an observation on my part.

  31. The Bible is scientifically accurate at every point.

    You… really don’t want to go down that path.

  32. Wow Thomas…. just wow.

    -That is the major problem, that the establishment has chosen to believe a lie (Darwinism) over the truth, because the established scientists hate God and love money-

    This statement hurts my brain on so many levels I had to read it twice, and make sure I wasn’t imagining things. First you assume that scientists BELIEVE in Darwinism. Science doesn’t want nor require belief, it is merely the act of testing and retesting a hypothesis in an attempt to explain something. The something can be chemical reactions, biological functions, the interaction of electrons when they’re shot into the nucleus of an atom, etc. etc. We start with a hypothesis, an idea that may or may not be true, and then we test it to see if holds up under experimentation or if the existing evidence supports it. If the hypothesis is confirmed after numerous experiments then it can be put forth for peer review so that other independent bodies can attempt to replicate the results, then so far so good. If the hypothesis stands up to peer review and replication, and if there isn’t another competing hypothesis that does a better job explaining the results or what you are trying to prove then congratulations, your hypothesis has become accepted theory. The results might be undeniable, but it is still just a theory because science isn’t in the habit of labeling anything as fact, because our understanding of something can change or be improved upon in the future.

    Love money and not God? While I am sure there are scientists and doctors out there that are well taken care of financially, I’ve never heard of a millionaire scientist (though I’m sure one does exist out there) but I have heard of millionaire evangelists and televangelists who are doing quite well for themselves by spreading the gospel. (Benny Hinn or Falwell anyone?)

    Galileo? Thomas can you please site your research on this matter? Where did you get your info from? This contradicts most sources on the subject of Galileo and the theory of heliocentricity. Its documented that Galileo’s writing, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, offended Pope Urban VIII and the inquisition found him guilty of heresy against the Bible condemning him to house arrest for the rest of his life (yay!)

    -It was taught from Joshua 10:12-13 that the sun revolved around the earth, but that is not what Scripture is saying in that passage (that thinking was forced into the text). It is written from the perspective of men [the way in which the Bible is written]. We as people say, “the sun is rising” or “the sun is setting,” you never hear someone say, “the earth is moving towards evening or morning.”) –

    EXACTLY, congratulations, you now agree with me Thomas, you now accept that the Bible was written by flawed people who didn’t know what they were writing about, and assert that each passage of it WORD FOR WORD is the absolute truth is absurd.

    -The Bible is scientifically accurate at every point.-

    Hmmm alright perhaps I jumped the gun, you just said the people who wrote it were flawed because they wrote things that are observably incorrect but now you’re saying its scientifically accurate? Do you not see the contradiction?

    The word “sun” comes from the Anglo-Saxon “sunne”, which in turn comes from the old High German word “sunna”. That means it’s a word which English inherited from the ancient Germanic languages, close but not that close.

    – The problem is we are fallible creatures reading a book that has been written by MEN but was not conceived by the mind of MEN, but by the Holy Spirit. Men were the pen and God was the hand using the pen to write the Bible.-

    Again you agree with me, but then at the end you bring up a point that is the most profound. If men were the pen for the Bible and they were merely recording what God told them to, then why would they defy God and put things like the Earth is immobile, and that the sun revolves around it, or that the Earth is on pillars, etc. etc. because we know these things are not true, and an omniprescent God wouldn’t tell his chief authors this if he wanted people to know the real truth about His Creation.

    -The bottom line is with this issue, if the Bible is not accurate than the entire history departments at universities should be closed down because we can’t trust any primary sources from history.-

    ???? So you’re saying any evidence of anything is impossible because we can’t prove things in the Bible? You know, I’ve never met Doctor Martin Luther King Jr, but I’m pretty sure he did exist, because of the books that were written about him, not to mention photos, paintings, news paper accounts etc. etc.

    -The Bible is the most accurate book on the planet. The amount of copies that exist testify to the Bible’s validity.-

    The truth is not democratic. 1000 years ago, the majority of people on this planet believed in witchcraft, a flat Earth, and that illness was the result of demonic possession. Today we know better. Science has improved our understanding of reality in just about every way. We live healthier and more productive lives, we have time for leisure activity, our children have a better chance to survive to adulthood, and we have left the boundaries of our small little world and journeyed into space with hopes of one day reaching other worlds. We’re progressing, we’re learning, we’re innovating, and its benefiting everyone. Just because a text book has been printed and reprinted for so long does not make it true (At least from a scientific standpoint), because its origins predate modern science, thus allowing its writers to record numerous false assumptions about reality and the origin of the Universe.

  33. lol hilarious post of the day, well done Thomas.

  34. Thomas

    I just heard about you recent illness. My condolences, and I hope your brain gets better soon.

    Sincerely,

    Mark

  35. Thomas, sincere simple question. Is there any number of religious scientists I could list to you that would sincerely change your view “because the established scientists hate God and love money”?

    I would ask for evidence, but we all know how that would go.

  36. I knew I would get a lot of reactions from my post! Thank you all for your comments. I do want to say that before I was born-again I thought much the same way all of you unbelievers think on this post. But after I was born-again I realized that I was wrong, wrong, dead wrong. I will say that both vintango2k and Nohm do raise some interesting points that are worth further study.

    I would like to say that when I was born-again, I was not born-again on intellectual grounds (my head) I was born-again from the heart (the conscience) the true place of repentance and faith in Christ takes place. I am blessed because I know Jesus Christ personally and it is a saying I have said before on here, “a man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with argument” (not my quote, someone much smarter than me came up with this one). This is a saying that I just thought of the other day, thank you Lord, “Christianity is based on evidence, but it does not rest on evidence, except the evidence of the Holy Spirit working in a changed life.” Merry Christmas and God bless!

    P.S.—The one thing that continues to sadden me over and over again on this blog is the number of unbelievers on here that make these issues out to be a laughing matter. There are a few however who don’t like Nohm, for example, but it just seems like the majority see this as funny. I don’t see how this is funny when we are dealing with issues of eternal consequences and that ultimately lives are at stake. (Though if you don’t believe in eternal things I can see maybe why it would be a laughing matter. I don’t know just wanted to make the comment.)

  37. Thomas,

    Do you understand why some people make “these issues” (specifically, your posts) out to be a laughing matter?

    It’s more than just that we don’t believe in eternal life.

    But I encourage you to try to think about it for a bit, and put yourself in our shoes.

  38. I will say that both vintango2k and Nohm do raise some interesting points that are worth further study.

    Bye, Tom, we’ll see you in a few weeks when you post the same incorrect arguments and then don’t respond to lengthy posts from Nohm and Vin.

  39. Thomas you get a lot of reactions from your post because it is foolish, you made bold declarations that fly in the face of historical evidence, followed up by wildly contradictory statements and you expect to be taken seriously? Yes you were born again and you feel good in your heart but just because you were born again in spirit doesn’t mean your mind has to suffer. God gave you a brain, common sense, and the ability to reason…. for a reason. You’re capable of understanding and learning, even… adapting… and discovering things or new information about the world. You are saved congratulations, now that means you can learn more about science and history without fear of losing your immortal soul. So please do.

  40. Thank you for your comments. I would like to comment on what Garrett said about not responding to Nohm and Vin. I would like to respond because there are answers to the statements and questions that they put forth, but I really don’t see any reason at this time. In the past on this blog I have commented time and time again but to no ad vale. It is comforting to know that many of the evidences I have given on this blog have helped lead many other reasonable atheists and agonistics to the Lord (the Lord was working on their hearts before hand. The evidence helped them along the way to repent and put their trust in Christ). But there is always that hardcore group that will not repent, NO MATTER WHAT! There is nothing else I can do but continue to pray for your salvation. This does not mean however that I will stop commenting. I will chime in from time to time on this blog and continue to present the validly for Christianity. Because I don’t know when God has prepared a heart for salvation. God bless you all and Merry Christmas!!!

    P.S.—Some Scriptures that come to mind on what I am, and many other believers on this blog are dealing with:

    “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.”—Matthew 7:6 (NIV)

    This two texts are very concerning for the unbeliever:

    “They know nothing, they understand nothing; their eyes are plastered over so they cannot see, and their minds closed so they cannot understand.”—Isaiah 44:18 (NIV)

    “They [the unbeliever] perish because they refuse to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.”—2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 (NIV)-words in brackets added by me.

  41. Suppose to read>P.S.—Some Scriptures that come to mind on where I am at, and many other believers on this blog are dealing with:

  42. Are we reading the same blog, Tom? Steve is always telling us to lighten up, so clearly we’re treating the matter seriously.

  43. Right, so we should take it that no amount of evidence would change Thomas’ mind then.

  44. What evidence Thomas? I will be the first to admit that I haven’t read many of your posts on this blog, but you’ve cited a bunch of questionable things and anecdotal evidence for the stuff you claim from what I’ve seen. You don’t have to list off a whole laundry of things, but just one will do. I do however find your quotes very interesting:

    – It sounds, and this is my interpretation of the passage based on what you posted, that the verse is telling the reader not to give what’s precious to you (The Scripture perhaps?) to people who don’t appreciate it or don’t understand it. But if that were the case then what is the point of evangelism if you’re trying to win the lost or change people’s hearts who are doubters or skeptics.

    – I’m assuming the second passage is just a general condemnation of people who doubt scripture or the faith in general. This statement is usually found in most religious institutions and solidifies the legitimacy of the faith as opposed to others. What I find interesting about it, is that it accuses the doubter of being closed minded when in fact agnostics and skeptics are just about the most open minded people in the world. Many wish and want to believe they just need to have some tangible proof to jump start their beliefs in the first place. Also the passage they know nothing and understand nothing is rather profound. Are doubters, agnostics, or skeptics who question scripture in favor of testable evidence ignorant in some way? And I suppose this segue’s into the next statement.

    – People perish because they refuse to love the truth, and as a result God sends them a delusion so that they will believe the lie and so be condemned. Amazing. I’m really floored by this. At first glance it seems to explain away doubters. Oh they’re sinful and the only reason why their science contradicts the Bible is because God sends them in a delusion that confirms their lie so they can keep on sinning. Its inane on so many levels it hurts. So…. radioactive decay, stellar drift, radiometric dating, the fossil record, the evolution of biological life, modern physics, and astrophysics and the conclusions they share that point to an origin that contradicts the Bible are all delusions for the unbelieving masses. Why in the world would a God that commanded, Thou Shalt Not LIE, LIE on such a massive scale to people. Not only lie to them but allow them to believe a lie by deluding them, that’s so deceptive, isn’t that something the devil would do??? And what would be the point of this in the first place? If the evidence pointed to Genesis being true, any evidence outside the Bible at all, Christian Scientists (The Ones who love Jesus, admit they’re sinners, pray for forgiveness) would have testable, quantifiable evidence that would stand up to peer review and would become the obvious dominant theory in science. But its NOT. And implying that doubters are wrong because they’re wicked and God is willfully deluding them contradicts everything we’re taught about God. He wants us to come to him, he wants people to repent, be good, pray for forgiveness of their sins, help each other, and believe in Jesus Christ as the savior. Sending the doubters or ‘unbelievers’ delusions is just cruel, when by the wave of His hand he could reveal His glory to the masses and silence any doubt in an instant.

  45. All of the unbelievers on here, I will say are one of a kind, there’s no doubt about that!

    vintango2k I’m glad to see that you find these quotes interesting. Please keep thinking on them and pondering them.

    I have time and time again on this blog sited that the four strongest evidences for the existence of God and, that Christianity is the only way to God is: Creation, Conscience, Christ and the Holy Spirit. You mention vintango2k that some how science goes against what the Bible is teaching on creation. But that is not what I have found in my studies (there is always more to learn). My sister and her husband both have degree’s in pre-med and have studied a lot about Darwinism and other area’s of science and they are both disciples of Jesus Christ. There have been and are countless other scientists who are believers in Jesus Christ and do not agree with what you are saying (this goes back to my pervious blog when I talked about the establishment of scientists. What I meant by that was the “godless scientists,“ because that seems to be who makes up the establishment in science today. The group of scientists who decide what is taught in schools for example).

    I also wanted to briefly comment while I am thinking about it on the issue that since men wrote the Bible and men are flawed that the Bible is flawed. The problem with that vintango2k is that means that science then is flawed and everything else that men and women endeavor to do is ultimately flawed. This would ultimately mean that we could not even trust ourselves because we are flawed. This of course is not true, there are many things which human beings have accomplished that has and is not flawed (airplanes, construction of buildings, going to the Moon etc). If these things didn’t work like airplanes and buildings, our way of life would be far different today. Good science has played a part in making these things possible and I’m not against science, what I don’t like is bad science and turning science into a “god” when it is only a tool to better humanity (and I do agree with your statement vintango2k that God has given us a mind to reason and we should use it to reason. A reasonable mind will lead one to God). But I want to end with saying that when the Bible was written in that moment when the writers first wrote down the words onto the parchment, in that moment they were flawless, ultimately, because of the Holy Spirit working through them. This does not mean that the writers were perfect and there were other times they were used by God, but in the moment that they penned the Scriptures the Holy Spirit was working through them and it was perfection that was written down. God bless!

  46. @ Thomas

    You never addressed the final point about God sending delusions, I find that particularly disturbing and difficult to rectify with violation of the law. But aside from that, Thomas no one is turning science into a ‘god’ no one is praying to science, no one is worshiping science, no asks science for forgiveness and no one believes that after they die, science will offer them eternal life in a sort of scientific heaven. The very notion of people doing that is not what science is about AT ALL. But you’re right science is a tool we use to better ourselves, and that involves furthering our understanding of reality and history. I appall bad science as well, that’s why its testable and peer reviewed so as to eliminate bias and false positive results. If ‘godless scientists’ were pushing an agenda using science then they are already doomed to failure because scientists with faith, ie. your sister and her husband. could easily call them out and destroy their theories with FACTS.

    On the subject of flaws, you’re right, a lot of what people do is flawed. One person can make a lot of major mistakes or minor ones. In my posts and your posts, there are grammatical and spelling errors, because of a lack of proof reading. Its why magazines and books have editors and proof readers, its why buildings and restaurants have inspectors, and its why pencils have erasers. But the people who wrote the Bible weren’t subject to peer review because they believed what they were writing was the infallible word of God. But if that was the case then why are their mistakes? If you were taking dictation from the almighty, presumably in a language you clearly comprehended and understood then why would you get anything wrong?

    Thomas, from what I’ve read in your posts, you seem to enjoy making a lot of assumptions about things. You speak in general terms about things that you couldn’t possibly know, and you seem to avoid going into specifics especially when you say you’ve been doing studies on the subject. Could you be more specific about what evidence you’ve found that supports the claims you make, I would love to read it?

  47. Hey vintango2k I have enjoyed the discussions we are having! Just a few questions before moving forward; what kind of specifics are you wanting for the evidence for God existence? What kind of evidence are you looking for or want to see that would convince you? And the most important question, when you speak of God what do mean by God? When you talk/write about God on here what are you thinking of? (I should have probably asked you this question to begin with.) Merry Christmas!

  48. Vin, what mistakes are you talking about in the Bible? Can you name two legitimate mistakes?

  49. @Thomas

    If you didn’t want answer my questions that’s okay. What kind of evidence would I like? Something that is testable, observable, and tangible, nothing too complicated really. Something that would prove beyond a reasonable doubt that God exists and which version of the Bible and which correct denomination of Christianity is the correct doctrine to follow for humanity. As it stands we have thousands of different religious sects on this world, and they can’t all be correct. Christians condemn other Christians and Catholics over how to interpret the Bible and any opposition or wrong interpretation of it can be silenced by one physical act by God. Can I name two legitimate mistakes? Sure.

    “The hare, for even though it chews the cud, it does not have divided hoofs; it is unclean for you.” — Lev. 11:6 – Rabbits don’t chew cud

    Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.” — Matthew 24:34 – Jesus said those that were around him at the time would not pass away until these things came to pass, I’m pretty sure that generation died a couple thousand years ago.

    Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: Matthew 24:29

    – The stars can’t fall from the sky, there are billions of them in space and the idea of them ‘falling’ is absurd.

    “God shakes the earth out of its place, and its pillars tremble.” — Job 9:6

    – The Earth isn’t on pillars

    “God has a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness.” — Job 26:10

    – The Earth isn’t a flat circle that rests on waters. Its a sphere of rock with parts of its surface covered in water that orbits around a sun in the vast expanse of space. If God wanted to tell us the story of how he created the world accurately he’d say to his chosen author just that. Primitive man wasn’t bright but I like to think they understood the difference between a circle and a sphere or ball. He could have even worded it simply for people to understand. “God created the earth, a great ball of rock so vast in size that all creatures, plants, waters, and people were drawn to its surface as it circled the sun in its place in the heavens”

    These are but a few examples, but perhaps the two verses in the Bible that I find most interesting Thomas, are these.

    Then answered the Lord unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
    Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
    Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?
    Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him?
    Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.
    Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.
    Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.
    Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret.
    Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.
    —Job 40:6-14

    – So a person can be saved by humbling themselves and others from the sin of pride. At least that’s how I interpret it, and belief in Jesus may not be required as long as a person shows sufficient humility.

    I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.
    —Isaiah 45:7

    – God creates Evil. Nuff Said. He’s all loving and merciful but he created evil for some reason. Cancer, flesh eating viruses, disease, earthquakes, hurricanes, etc. etc. he decided to create it, thus rendering the devil redundant or acting at the behest of God’s will. If you interpret Satan the way the Hebrews do then this makes perfect sense, his role is logical and he is an agent of God, but if you interpret it the Christian way it doesn’t make much sense at all.

    What am I thinking of when I write about God? The Judeo Christian God of course. Not Allah or some new age God or something like that.

  50. Vin I do want to answer your questions. I don’t want to make any assumptions about where you are coming from. I have done that before on this blog with some of the other unbelievers and was attacked, so first I need to know where you are coming from. First off our greatest evidence for the existence of God is creation itself. Creation is testable, observable, and tangible, that from it’s complexity something created all that we see. Do you really believe nothing became something? How could nothing become something with out something greater doing the creating. Nothing is nothing, is nothing to begin with. I’m sorry Vin but you and the other non-believers on this blog have never given me a reason NOT to believe in God. I just don’t have enough faith to be an atheist.

    Vin first before I answer you on the Bible text you have brought up, do you have a Christian background? It just seems like you do. The thing I have noticed on this blog with the unbelievers is the fact that the others and you read the Bible literally when it should be read figuratively and you read it figuratively when it should be read literally. Reading the Bible is an art and science. Though we do read it like we would any other book we must always remember that the Bible was written for us not to us. This is what makes understanding the Bible an art and science. I want to address a couple passages that you brought up:

    “Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.” — Matthew 24:34

    The context of this verse is what was to happen in 70 A.D. with the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. That generation of course was still alive when the temple was destroyed. This idea of the destruction of the temple was connected to the Son of Man’s second coming, in the sense that it would be a day of wrath. It is a text that has two ideas being presented at the same time. Good one to bring up though.

    Vin you brought up Job 40:6-14 as some how declaring that one does not need Jesus Christ for salvation. Before Jesus came to the earth physically people were saved when they repented and put there trust in the true and living God which is the God of Israel. Because of the sacrifices being made within the Israelite belief system, sins where being stored up for the day that Jesus Christ would come and die on the cross. When Jesus died on the cross he took the punishment for all sins in all history from Adam and Eve all the way up to the last person that would ever live, that would repent and trust Him as Savior and Lord. Of course salvation comes only by repentance and trust in Jesus (who is God in the flesh) for salvation. Again before Jesus walked the earth, those who repented and trust the God of Israel were saved. They just didn’t know the name of Jesus specifically. When Job repented he was repenting and trusting the God of the Hebrews. Those sins of Job were stored up and on that day many thousands of years later they were poured out on Jesus Christ at the cross. Jesus’ death and resurrection were planned from the very beginning. This is only the very beginning of this type of question Vin, but for now it is something for you to think about and ponder.

    Vin you mention that some how the Bible teaches that the earth is a flat circle. This flat circle idea does not come from the Bible but from Roman thinking. The Romans believe that the earth was a flat disk. Look at this text from Isaiah 40:22-”God is enthroned above the circle of the earth;…” (which by the way was written way before the Romans came on the scene). Now here is a further quote on this text, “While the shape of the planet was not Isaiah’s concern here, his phrase is a reminder that modern critics should be cautious about ascribing a ‘primitive’ or “pre-scientific’ outlook to Scripture, as a way of discounting its relevance to contemporary cultures.” (Apologetics Study Bible, pg.1044). No where in the Bible does it teach that the earth is flat. It is known from history, for example, that Christopher Columbus knew the earth was round for two reasons, one because of observation and two because of the Bible. As you know the educated people of Columbus’ day were all Bible literate.

    “The hare, for even though it chews the cud, it does not have divided hoofs; it is unclean for you.” — Lev. 11:6

    This is an interesting verse. I have not looked into this verse in particular but other verses that are similar. What I have learned so far is that the Hebrews categorized things differently than we do today. For example in Lev 11:23 the grasshopper is described as having four legs, today we categorize it as having six legs. When we observe the rabbit one can say that it does chew the cud. We have to remember the Bible is not a science book at it’s core, is the Bible really presenting science in this particular passage or merely observation from the person writing it? More to study on this one.

    Vin your final section is on a very debated passage within Christianity, a passage that has been debated for many thousands of years within the church. But before we move forward please answer me this, how can you being an atheist (I am assuming you are an atheist from your writings) claim anything can be good or evil? An atheist has no moral ground to stand on, really how can you claim that anything is good or evil in the first place. Would you agree that murder and rape, for example, are evil? I am assuming you would agree but my question is WHY are they evil? What makes those acts evil? Something to think about.

    Finally Vin you said this: “which version of the Bible and which correct denomination of Christianity is the correct doctrine to follow for humanity.”

    There is no perfect translation of the Bible. There are translations that are better than other translations, but if a person has at least three good translations (NIV, NASB, ESV) they are getting a much fuller picture of what the original text said. Though one good translation will still do. Also there is not a “correct” denomination so to speak. The reason we have different denominations is because people disagree on secondary issues (baptism, communion, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, certain traditions within the church and how they are connected to the Bible, etc.) but agree on primarily issues (the deity of Jesus Christ, the atonement, the Trinity, the authority of the Bible, etc.). I hope that helps a little.

    Again to end with the Bible is supreme over all other texts because of four main reasons:

    1. Science
    2. Historians and Archeology
    3. Textual Evidence
    4. Prophecy

    There is so much more that could be written about Vin. I have enjoyed our debates thus far. God bless and Merry Christmas!

  51. Thomas, Vin isn’t an unbeliever. He (and please correct me if I am wrong, Vintango) is Catholic.

  52. One thing that always bugs me is that many Christians here tell the atheists that they have no moral ground to stand on. This strikes a nerve with me. I’d like to give you two people. Please pick out the one you think is Christian.

    Person 1 gives of his time and talent to Habitat for Humanity. He helped organize a memorial 5K run for a beloved member of the community who died of ALS in his 20s.

    Person 2 is married, with children, in a public job, and is fired for having an affair with a member of the same sex, while abusing drugs.

    Which one is more Christian? I think we’d all agree it’s person 1. He has a moral grounding that enables him to give to others and share what God has given him.

    Person 1 is my old college roommate, an atheist.

    Person 2 is Ted Haggard, American evangelical preacher, the founder and former pastor of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado; a founder of the Association of Life-Giving Churches.

    • My answer would be “Who knows?” Being a Christian is “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9).

      There is absolutely no way of knowing who is and who isn’t a Christian this side of Heaven. Christianity is all about a _personal_ relationship with God, not some sort of vicarious relationship through a Pastor or leader. Pastors are human, they fail. There are plenty of non-Christians doing good deeds too, but that doesn’t make them “Good people.” Jesus tells us that nobody is good enough. Not one.

      That’s why God sent us the law (10 Commandments) to prove to us that we were not worthy, but then He sent us the solution as well – His Son Jesus Christ who died on a cross to pay the penalty for your sin (and my sin!). He paid for Ted Haggard too, and your friend from college. On judgement day the only thing that will matter is whether we have accepted Jesus’ death as payment and whether we have confessed His name with our lips, and believed in our hearts that He is God.” Being raised from the dead as the first fruits of the New Covenant is the proof (from God Himself) that Jesus is the Messiah.

      No one would ever deny that you can find exceptions on either side of this argument, that ain’t the point. You’ve … missed it completely.

      • Yes but Ted Haggard was largely ignored by Christians. I heard a fellow in my Church preach to a man who brought up Ted Haggard. The fellow ignored. You can’t ignore it and many Christians do. That’s MY point. You can’t ignore the exceptions.

      • Scott, I’d also point out that Bizzle was objecting to the claim that atheists have no moral ground to stand on.

        In your “Answer to an atheist” post, you at least *imply* (please correct me if I’m wrong) the same thing.

        Bizzle was not arguing who is “good”, but whether or not the claim “atheists have no moral ground to stand on” is correct.

        Also, there’s a big difference, in my world, between “Pastors are human, they fail”, and “a guy who fought against the rights of homosexuals, and had the ear of a president, turns out to enjoy meth and gay sex”.

        There’s also a difference between “some pastor at a local church” and “Ted Haggard”.

      • Nohm,

        Thank you, that is what I was trying to say.

  53. To Bizzle – I think you miss the point.

    Christians ask the non-believer where do your morals come from if NOT from God? That’s the rub. Your morals are subjective. Who is to say it’s wrong to lie? Wrong to steal? If I am not hurting anyone then what’s the big deal? So we say you have no moral ground. Who determines what is acceptable? Society? We go back to Nazi Germany… was it ok to torture the Jews because society in Germany accepted it? Morality for non-believers is ever changing and shifting. As believers we acknowledge what is true – we have all been given a conscience by God to know right from wrong. And in your example BOTH Ted and your roommate will stand before a holy and just God who will see that justice is served to both parties.

    So it’s not about “who is more christian” as you say. It’s about none of us being “good” and all of us having to give an account to God on judgment day. How do you think you will do on that day? The bible says that all of us are guilty, and warns us that the penalty is eternity in Hell.

    This is the power of the Gospel – we rightly deserve Hell – but Jesus Christ died for us and then rose again three days later paying the price for you and me. It’s a legal transaction that took place. We have committed the crime and Jesus paid the fine for us. God can legally dismiss our case. Repentance, and faith in trust in Jesus Christ are the requirements that God puts on us.

    It’s a free gift lest any man boast. Salvation is by grace alone. You can’t earn salvation by doing “good” deeds. So your example of one person doing good things, and another doing bad things is void. BOTH are sinners – and BOTH will stand before All Mighty God to give an account. The bible says our righteous deeds are like filthy rags in the eyes of the Lord.

    As I said salvation is a gift. You can accept that gift or reject it. It’s your call. Broad is the way that leads to destruction, narrow is the road that leads to salvation. Few that find it…
    Listen to your conscience – repent of your sin – and cry out to God and He will save you.

  54. Thomas I never claimed to be an atheist, I claim to be a Catholic, but I also claim to be a thinker as well. You repeat a lot of arguments I’ve heard several other apologetics make, and they’re no more compelling.

    – I’m not trying to prove God doesn’t exist, I’m trying to PROVE that the Genesis account is wrong and inaccurate, and foolish to cling onto. You see there have been NUMEROUS gospels that were voted out of the Bible for one reason or another, usually by consensus by Church hierarchies and by what gospels appealed the most to people. Its the reason why not every Apostle of Jesus has a Gospel when more of them originally did.

    – A circle is flat… a 2-D dimensional object, a disc. If they had believed it to be round they would have said round, or said a ball, or a sphere, these are not alien concepts to even a bronze age society.

    – You prefer the questions be directed in one way? Its sort of insulting but okay, if you don’t want to show your work that’s fine, I can only assume you’re either making it up or embarrassed by the source?

    – Creation is proof of the existence of God. Creation is testable, observable, and tangible, that from it’s complexity something created all that we see. Do you really believe nothing became something? How could nothing become something with out something greater doing the creating. Nothing is nothing, is nothing to begin with. I’m sorry Vin but you and the other non-believers on this blog have never given me a reason NOT to believe in God. – Again I’m not trying to convince you God doesn’t exist but your argument isn’t scientific, you’re right its very hard to believe something came from nothing, but scientists don’t claim that, the Big Bang Theory and other ‘origin’ stories are merely theories on why there are dense elements in our universe. The best science has to offer is that the universe existed as a singularity or maybe a few singularities that exploded outwards creating the universe as we know it. What came before that? Its unknown, and currently we have no way of knowing. Could God have created it the singularity? Its a possibility but absence of evidence isn’t proof. Someone of a different faith, Thomas, could easily say the same thing, “Look around you, the creation is evidence of Zeus… or the Titans, or Jupiter, or Odin, or Mithras, or Krishna. Its the same argument.”

    – Vin your final section is on a very debated passage within Christianity, a passage that has been debated for many thousands of years within the church. But before we move forward please answer me this, how can you being an atheist (I am assuming you are an atheist from your writings) claim anything can be good or evil? An atheist has no moral ground to stand on, really how can you claim that anything is good or evil in the first place. Would you agree that murder and rape, for example, are evil? I am assuming you would agree but my question is WHY are they evil?

    – That’s an excellent deflection Thomas, thank you for not addressing the issue at all. You want to know about morality? Its everywhere and its not just in the Bible. The Japanese, the Chinese, Native American Tribes, South American tribes, African tribes, they all have a sense of morality that differ from each other but have some common elements. Murder, theft, and other moral issues are there even without the acceptance of God or the Bible. Thomas it exists in the ANIMAL kingdom, wolves, bears, elephants, gorillas; in all social animals from piranhas to people it is abhorent for us to kill members of our own species because of the simple fact that if we did do that we wouldn’t survive as a species. Society ultimately dictates morality NOT the Bible, not exclusively anyways. What do I mean by that? Look at the Book of Leveticus. The Bible talks about how Moses proclaimed to the people to take the virgin women for themselves to rape as they saw fit after slaughtering their people, all at the command of God. The Bible also informs us about the proper care of slaves, and how to properly beat your slave. By the standard of the Bible we should be slave owners, its the moral thing to do after all. But the standards of morality change. We no longer stone people to death Thomas, we’ve outgrown that, we’ve changed, and so has our interpretation of the Bible. You insist that the passage, about the Earth being a circle is proof of some round Earth. That’s a contemporary interpretation of that passage, for hundreds of years people interpreted it as meaning the Earth is FLAT, and it was punishable by death if you disagreed with established dogma. Nowadays Dogma is met with how it should be, ridicule and skepticism.

    – Your last 4 bullet points can you please prove how the Bible supersedes other texts in:

    – Science
    – History and Archeology
    – Textual Evidence <—- (Not exactly sure what that means)
    – Prophecy <— please list examples of what prophecies have come to pass that are listed clearly in the Bible as opposed to a source like say Nostradamus for example.)

  55. Dennis,

    Is something good simply because God says it’s good? Or is something inherently good, and God is simply passing that info along to you?

    There’s a major problem with both.

    I get the feeling that you’ve never actually looked into where non-believers get their morals, Dennis.

  56. Thomas wrote:

    “When we observe the rabbit one can say that it does chew the cud.”

    Where? Where have we ever observed rabbits doing this?

    “Creation is testable, observable, and tangible,”

    By using the word “Creation”, you’re assuming your own conclusion. That’s a no-no.

    “that from it’s complexity something created all that we see.”

    By using the word “created”, you’re assuming your own conclusion. As for complexity, what is more complex: a cave, or a table?

    How do you determine that?

    “Do you really believe nothing became something?”

    No, and neither does anyone else. You’ve been taught this garbage, yet none of us claim “nothing became something”.

    E=mc^2, Thomas.

    But here’s the thing. Every creationist that I’ve ever run across accuses non-believers of this opinion, but yet I’ve NEVER met a non-believer who thinks “nothing became something”.

    Drop that silly straw-man already.

    “How could nothing become something with out something greater doing the creating. Nothing is nothing, is nothing to begin with.”

    Drop this straw-man. It makes you look foolish.

    Also, that then begs the question of “where did God come from?” Because if you say, “he doesn’t need a creator”, then you just broke the very rule that you created for this argument.

    This is a very bad argument, Thomas. This is why people don’t take what you write seriously.

    • Thomas wrote:

      “When we observe the rabbit one can say that it does chew the cud.”

      Technically, the rabbit’s digestive tract is so inefficient that it runs the food through once, poops it out, and eats the pellet to run it through again. Because coprophagia is a sure sign of Intelligent Design.

      So, not quite “cud,” as such…

  57. Also, Thomas, the word that is used in the Bible for the word being circle means a flat disk. They had the word for “sphere/ball”, and they did not use that word there.

    Viewing the world as a flat disk, supported by pillars, was the common view at that time.

    They were wrong.

    Look, no one is trying to make you an atheist. We just get frustrated with these arguments that show that you haven’t fully investigated these issues, and are simply repeating what someone else told you or something you read.

    Lastly, a key question. You wrote: “Would you agree that murder and rape, for example, are evil?”

    Thomas, is God the *ONLY* thing stopping you from murdering and raping? If you no longer believed in God, would you rape and then murder the first person you saw?

    Why, or why not?

    If God *IS* the only thing stopping you, then please, stick with your belief, because you’re a psycho.

    If it’s *NOT* the only thing stopping you, then you’ve found a secular reason to not rape or murder, which is what we’ve done.

  58. @Dennis

    You want to know where our morality came from? Its a product of our evolution, simple as that. The species can’t continue on if we’re eating/killing/ stealing from each other or betraying each other. Social animals survive by helping each other rather then working against each other. It occurs in the animal kingdom and it has occurred in every human culture with or without the Bible from the beginnings of human civilization. You list the Nazi’s as an example of “man’s morality” without God, but I prefer to look at it as an example of how society’s die off because they don’t adhere to these principles. The Nazi’s exterminated the Jews, killed off millions of European citizens and waged war on the World killing their fellow man. For humanity to survive we rose up against them and toppled their society and discarded it into the trash bin of history. The funny thing was was that the Nazi’s had the endorsement of the Catholic Church and proudly proclaimed that God was on their side. Does this make them morale? Did God not command Moses to tell his chosen people to murder other tribes, to keep only their young virgin daughters for themselves? What is morale about that when compared to the Nazi’s?

  59. Dennis,

    Not sure if you’ve read my past posts, but you will see that I am not atheist. My point is that we are supposed to share the Gospel with love. Yet telling people they have no moral ground because they don’t believe in God (and that’s our God or the Muslim god, or any other god) isn’t loving. I think many can find it insulting.

    Ted Haggard apparently has moral standing because he’s a believer. Yet he had homosexual relations and abused drugs.

  60. Vin thank you for clearing things up for me on where you are coming from. Where do I begin. There is so much to address between Nohm and you. But at least I have given you things to think about as opposed to just saying “just have faith.” If I were to say that that would be blind faith, and Christianity is not a blind faith as opposed to say atheism for example. Correct me if I am wrong, but how Vin can you call yourself a Catholic and then go and undermine the Genesis account? If the Genesis account is not accurate this undermines the whole Bible and the Bible should be thrown out. And last I checked the Catholic Church does adhere to the Bible to a certain extent.

    Vin can you explain to me further on this quote-“You prefer the questions be directed in one way? Its sort of insulting but okay, if you don’t want to show your work that’s fine, I can only assume you’re either making it up or embarrassed by the source?” Thank you.

    Now let’s look at Isaiah 45:7, the passage that seems to be really getting on your nerves. There is no “easy” answer to this Scripture. I will present some answers from other sources for you to read and think on.

    “Why would a loving God create disaster? (NIV translates evil as disaster). The best answer might rest in the image of God as a loving parent, who offers care but insists on obedience. The specific disaster in the minds of the readers was the captivity of the Jews, which was clearly intended as a lesson for Israel, one that would draw them into greater obedience.”-Quest Study Bible, pg.1046

    Here is another explanation from the Apologetics Study Bible, pg.1052, “The Hebrew word for ‘evil’ (translated ‘disaster’) represents natural calamity as well as moral evil. God, in His perfection, does nothing morally evil. But, since all events are subject to His control, He is ultimately responsible for all events in history and nature. Moral evil derives from the choices of human beings and angels.”

    Now to the last section about the Bible and it’s superiority. No other book fulfills these criteria as the Bible does:

    Science- Science confirms the Bible… in other words science is often just “catching up” with what the Bible said thousands of years before.

    The Bible: Ocean contains springs (Job 38:16)
    Science Then: Ocean fed only by rivers and rain.
    Science Now: Ocean contains spring

    The Bible: When dealing with disease, hands should be washed under running water (Leviticus 15:13)
    Science Then: Hands washed in still water.
    Science Now: When dealing with disease, hands should be washed under running water.

    The Bible: Innumerable stars (Jeremiah 33:22)
    Science Then: Only 1,100 stars.
    Science Now: Innumerable stars

    The Bible: Creation made of invisible elements (Hebrews 11:3)
    Science Then: Science was ignorant on the subject.
    Science Now: Creation made of invisible elements (atoms).
    (From the Open-Air Pocket Book pg. 29 and Evidence Bible pg. 1631, both Living Waters).

    History and Archeology- “Secular history supports the Bible. For example, in The Antiquities of the Jews, book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3 the famous historian Flavius Josephus writes:
    ‘Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works-a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.’ (Open-Air Pocket Book. Living Waters. Pg. 31)
    This is just one text from history outside of the Bible (another I just recently read that is similar comes from the book “The Annals of Imperial Rome“ by Cornelius Tacitus). In the area of archeology no other book, the Bible, has been used more for furthering the field of archeology. In other words archeology has not disproved the Bible, archeology has proven and strengthen the Bible’s validity.

    Textual Evidence- “Both the Old and New Testament are strongly supported by manuscript evidence (the evidence of early hand written copies). The famous Dead Sea Scrolls are one example of the Old Testament evidence. These documents came from the ‘library’ of a settlement founded at Qumran before 150 B.C. and abandoned about 68 A.D. Some of the manuscript copies were made during that period, and some were written earlier (third century BC) and brought to the settlement. Ignoring spelling-oriented (orthographic) changes and similar small differences, the Dead Sea Scrolls match the Hebrew text behind today’s Old Testament, in spite of the passage of over 2,000 years (where one would expect errors to creep in). Over 20,000 known manuscript document the New Testament text. This makes the New Testament the most reliable document of antiquity (a document written before the printing press). These manuscripts vary in size from a part of a page to an entire Bible (Old and New Testaments). The earliest New Testament manuscripts date from the second century (100-199) A.D. These manuscript copies were written in different languages by people of different nationalities, cultures, and backgrounds. In spite of all those differences between them, the New Testament texts all agree.” (Open-Air Pocket Book. Living Waters. Pg.33-34)

    Prophecy- Here are a few prophecies fulfilled from the Bible. There are many, many more:

    Babylon would rule Judah for 70 years

    Predicted- 626 B.C.
    Fulfilled- 609 B.C.
    Jeremiah 25:11-12

    The Messiah would be born in Bethlehem

    Predicted- 8th century B.C.
    Fulfilled- 1st century A.D.
    Micah 5:2

    The Jews would come together as a nation again and return to their homeland

    Predicted- 750 B.C.
    Fulfilled- 1948 A.D.
    Amos 9:14-15; Isaiah 66:7-8; Ezekiel 34:13

    (Prophecy info from the Open-Air Pocket Book. Living Waters. Pg.35)

    There you go Vin a little more to think on. I hope that helps maybe a little bit more. God bless!

    (Though a lot of information I present comes from Living Waters, this information is in public domain and comes from other sources that Living Waters has gathered it from. This is from the study of history, science and other area‘s of study. Living Waters has just made it much more accessible, they did all the leg work in putting it together).

  61. Nohm your back, how are doing? You always seem to pose the most interesting questions. I want to address the one on morality. This the second evidence for God in the three C’s. creation, Conscience and christ. The Holy Spirit being the one who brings is all together.

    Nohm said, “Thomas, is God the *ONLY* thing stopping you from murdering and raping? If you no longer believed in God, would you rape and then murder the first person you saw?
    Why, or why not?
    If God *IS* the only thing stopping you, then please, stick with your belief, because you’re a psycho.
    If it’s *NOT* the only thing stopping you, then you’ve found a secular reason to not rape or murder, which is what we’ve done.

    Those who do not believe in God do have a God-given conscience (though the conscience of the unbeliever is endanger of being seared as the Bible teaches [1 Timothy 4:2]. When an ungodly person repents and trusts in Jesus for salvation the Holy Spirit comes and renews, restores and strengthens the conscience that is already present in the new believer). That is how people around the world know right from wrong even though they may not know the one true living God. The Ten Commandments are written on the hearts of all human beings. From culture to culture there are differences to some degree on right and wrong. But the foundation of the Ten Commandments is found in all human societies.

    Your first question is No because I have a conscience that tells me what is right and wrong. This conscience given by God tells me that murdering and raping is wrong.

    What is your secular reason to not rape or murder Nohm?

    Nohm here’s the problem, if God is not the originator for the conscience and the conscience is just something man has created over time due to trial and error than is it possible that at some point, for example, rape could be considered a good action? Or at some point marriage between a man and a woman could be seen as out of date and evil?

    God bless and Merry Christmas!

  62. Thomas,

    A word of warning: the atheists here give Living Waters and Ray Comfort little credence on these boards.

  63. Thomas,

    The problem with your big copy-and-paste above is that you haven’t actually investigated any of these claims made by Living Waters.

    At the very least, it appears that you haven’t investigated the counter-arguments to these, that you can find on various counter-apologetic websites.

    And, as I’ve mentioned before, that’s my problem with discussing issues with you. You throw a whole lot of bare assertions out there, and I get tired of having to do your research for you.

  64. So basically three prophecies, one involving the savior, one happening in hundreds of years in BC, before many of the books were written and one saying that a race of people that occupied a land would eventually get the land back. There have been numerous books written about Nostrodamus that interpret his prophecies as predicting all sorts of things. And it all really comes down to interpretation, just like the Bible because….

    – The Bible doesn’t address science. To say it does stretches the imagination. Your quotes are so vague that they do nothing to further science at all. Why do I say this, because we didn’t discover atoms till modern times and they are not ‘invisible’. The stars are NOT innumerable as the concept of ‘infinity’ doesn’t truly exist, and while we do not know the exact amount of stars in the universe it is most likely not ‘infinite’ and one day we may in fact know the total amount of stars in the universe. If there was science or scientific data in the bible we would have been making scientific stuides in the bronze age rather then in the modern age. As it stands there are thousands of modern textbooks on science, biology, medicine, physics that explain the universe and science in general better then the Bible does, that’s inarguable fact.

    You wonder how I can be catholic and not believe in Genesis? Just like Protestants seperated from the Catholic church over arguments with papal doctrines (Doctrines that were added to the Catholic dogma because the Pope prayed on it and the truth was revealed to him by God, something that you claim when interpretting the correctness of the Bible) Modern Catholics and Christians who know anything about science, know that Genesis and what we know about modern biology, physics, geology, etc. clashes so heavily that either one or the other is correct but not both. Just as reformation Christians rejected papal doctrine as being the illegitmate word of God, modern people reject Genesis because it contradicts reality. Genesis and science clash. Period. You can not believe in Genesis and accept modern science like physics (which incorporates Big Bang theory, formation of the elements, radioactive decay, radiometric dating, etc.) because they contradict one another so heavily. Rational Christians and Catholics accept that Genesis was either interpretted wrong and is not necessary in relation to Jesus’ message, to defend it is foolish in the face of evidence, and ultimately irrelevent since everything we understand about the morality the bible teaches comes from the commandments and from Jesus.

  65. Hi Thomas,

    First of all, I notice that you make a lot of assertions without trying to explain why they’re true. This is frustrating.

    Regardless, you wrote:

    What is your secular reason to not rape or murder Nohm?

    1. Because I don’t think I’d like it if someone raped or murdered me.

    2. You’re missing the larger point: the concept of a society thinking that rape and murder are good just does not work.

    Here’s a thought experiment: take some time, more than a few hours, and really think of how a society that views murder and rape as *good* would work.

    Just how long do you think such a society would survive?

    So yes, it appears to me that societies and cultures define their own morality, usually based on what has been shown to work. But I’m not worried about a group changing their morality to think that raping and murdering is good because such a group would not survive for long.

    Just try to imagine what such a society would look like, and how it would survive.

    As for thinking that marriage between a man and a woman is evil and dated, that’s a pretty specific thing, but my guess is that such a society would have to re-define “out of wedlock” if it would want to survive. Unless there’s the possibility of adopting children from other societies throughout the generations, but I don’t see how that could be sustained.

    Lastly, I’ve always enjoyed the claim of “Israel came back, it was prophesied!”, as there’s a subtle math error that’s made in it. But I guess God can alter math to His whims, much like morality, right? 😉

  66. More good debating going on here. First off I would like to say I have really enjoyed speaking to both Vin and Nohm! Both of you have been used by God in my life to strengthen me in what I believe and why I believe it, namely Christianity. These types of debates cause me to learn and study more. Also I am going to be away from the computer for a few days so I won’t be commenting regularly for a couple of days, going to see the family early for Christmas. I plan to, if possible, get on the blog to see what’s going on. I may be able to do a comment then.

    First off I knew that the evidences and proofs I presented would be attacked because the source was Living Waters, that’s why I mentioned that Living Waters is not the one coming up with this, they are merely reporting the information and making it accessible. Maybe you didn’t read that part of my pervious post. The bottom line is I don’t think it would matter what source I got any of my information from none of you would except it as creditable at all! Now I know that you can throw that back in my face and say that I would say you’re sources are not creditable. So I guess it just comes down to who is teaching the truth. It looks like it is a fifty-fifty shot ultimately.

    Vin- You are wrong that the Bible does not address science. I gave you just a taste of the information, the only thing I can think of is that the Bible does not address science in the way YOU want it to be addressed. I know you are not going to like this question, but what is your definition of science? If in fact the Genesis account is not accurate historically and scientifically then the entire Bible has been undermined. The Bible is a false book and should at best be thrown aside and at worst be burned. But that is not what I have seen in my time of learning and study on the Genesis account (there is of course always more to learn). What I have learned shows that the Genesis account was way ahead of it’s time when it was penned, and all the way up until modern science came of age, and eventually matched what the Genesis account was already saying. Now I am not here to debate the age of the earth or the universe. That is really a none issue in the long run, there is no way we are every really going to know how old everything really is (though I would lean more towards a younger earth and universe just from what I have studied). The most important question is, is the book of Genesis historically, scientifically and reasonably based and accurate The answer is yes, for those who are not blinded by their own opinions and bias.’

    Vin-Thank you for the explanation on how you can be a Catholic and not believe in the Genesis account.

    Nohm- Hello, so morals are right and wrong, good and evil because society has decided that it should be that way? You are right Nohm that a society that holds murder and rape in high-esteem is not going to be around very long, that you are right about. But the problem is this, that still does not necessary make it evil. It is only “evil” because really its inconvenient. If what you are saying is true Nohm then there is always going to be someone who testes what is right and wrong and as we know with the Nazis,’ for example, they as a society decided that evil things could be dealt to a certain people and that was deemed ok by law. Now thank God there were individuals who stood up to what was going on in Nazi Germany (majority of those standing up were true converts of Jesus Christ). But here is the scary part, if what you are saying is right then there is ultimately no justice. Every year thousands of crimes (if not more) go unsolved. Just think of the horror of someone you love that is raped and murdered and the criminal is never found. If there was no justice beyond this world what a waste ultimately. You live, you die, that’s it. Thank God there will be a day of justice when every person will have a fair trial!

    Nohm said, “The problem with your big copy-and-paste above is that you haven’t actually investigated any of these claims made by Living Waters.”—Yes I have, once again I had a disclaimer of why I used Living Waters as a source. I guess in the future I will have to find sources that hopefully you will not have a clue about. The only problem with that is then you will have a harder and longer time searching out the credibility of the source.

    Nohm said, “At the very least, it appears that you haven’t investigated the counter-arguments to these, that you can find on various counter-apologetic websites.”—I have to a certain extent, but I am learning more, and Nohm you have introduced me to a lot of these counter-arguments. Again I thank you for that because God has used it every time to dig deeper for truth. And all truth points back to Jesus.

    Nohm said, “And, as I’ve mentioned before, that’s my problem with discussing issues with you. You throw a whole lot of bare assertions out there, and I get tired of having to do your research for you.”—Like I said before (with all due respect and humility) at least I am giving proofs, arguments, evidences, sources and reasons. All you do Nohm and others on here is attack. Nohm you have done more in the area of giving information though I will say (another guy I can think of was an unbeliever on here named Chris. I believe that was his name) than a lot of the other unbelievers on here, which I greatly appreciate. I apologize that I am making you work so hard. I think I said it before I know that you and others will give many of those counter-arguments, also time wise it would take a great amount of time to go through EVERYTHING on a simple blog like this. But you are right Nohm I need to do a better job of presenting the counter-arguments within the arguments. Still learning. Sorry about that.

    I would like to briefly address Leviticus 11:6. We had talked about this previously. Leviticus 11:20 poses a similar situation, “All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you.” (NIV). Here is an explanation for the passage: “Insects, by definition, have six legs. It’s possible the Israelites didn’t count jumping legs as regular legs. We cannot be overly concerned about technical definitions when the Bible categorizes animals for religious rather than scientific reasons.” (Quest Study Bible. Pg. 156). As you can see this is in relation to the debate on the rabbit chewing the cud. From an observational standpoint the rabbit chews grass, which can be considered cud. But the Bible in this instance is not necessarily trying to be scientific. Sorry Nohm I really don’t have a counter-argument for this one off the top of my head. Remember reading the Bible is an art and science and it can’t be fully read and understood without the rudder of the Holy Spirit steering the way.

    Merry Christmas!

    P.S.—And please remember that though we broke the Ten Commandments (we‘ve all told a lie at some point, taken something that does not belong to us (a thief), taken God‘s name in vain (blasphemy) and/or hated someone and committed murder in our heart), Jesus Christ has paid the fine through his life’s blood. His death on the cross along with his resurrection sealed satan’s and death’s defeat. We are guilty in God’s courtroom (that’s hell for eternity), but Jesus settled the fine to give us heaven for eternity. Now God commands all people to repent and put their trust in Jesus to save them. Please do that today and God will grant you eternal life by forgiving your sins. Not because of me, not because of you, but because of Jesus and who He is. A God that gives us what we do not deserve. Please repent and trust Jesus. Today is the day of salvation.

  67. Thomas, first off I hope you and everyone here has a very Merry Christmas or whatever you choose to celebrate this time of your, and second, it sounds like you don’t really know what science IS, and I would love to see your source on how modern scientific theory in any way, shape, or form matches the Genesis account of the Earth and the universe being poofed into existence in 6 actual days or a great flood covering the Earth. Real christian scientists have striven for over a century to legitimately prove the claims of Genesis and have failed. Lets take an example like say – Kangaroos – presumably if there was great flood that covered the Earth (And didn’t eradicate all insect and plant life on the planet after 40 days and 40 nights) and all the animals on the world ended up in one place on the planet, then why in the world Thomas, do we ONLY find evidence of Kangaroos ever having inhabited Australia. We’ve looked all over the place Thomas, and every fossil and skeleton of Kangaroos we’ve found has been in Australia. Now the Kangaroo is not the most adept swimmer, so its doubtful that any of them could have swam to Australia, and neither would they have the motivation to in the first place. I have time and time again said what science is, above all else, its not a belief system, its the antithesis of one, because it demands replication, physical proof, and testability through peer review. Thomas, how would you feel if you were in the hospital and a doctor told you that they’re going to try a new drug on you to treat your illness, and that they hadn’t tested it or even had other scientists or doctors review its effects but they ‘believed’ it would work on you, would you feel safe at all taking that drug?

    “Every year thousands of crimes (if not more) go unsolved. Just think of the horror of someone you love that is raped and murdered and the criminal is never found. If there was no justice beyond this world what a waste ultimately.”

    Thomas according to your belief system the people that murder or rape can mentally speak with Jesus, believe in him, pray for forgiveness and promise never to sin again, will be washed clean because we’re all sinners, murderers, adulterers at heart, and Jesus already paid their fine, but since they acknowledge their sin they’ll be forgiven and you can spend eternity with the person that murdered your family or potentially raped you. Is any part of what I just said sound remotely just to you? You see Ray loves to say, if you’ve ever hated someone you’ve committed murder, so that means we’re all murderers. So if someone actually murders another person its no more ‘evil’ then a person who hates which is… everyone. So by your beliefs human beings have no reason to conform, they can loot, pillage, rape, and murder to their evil heart’s content and as long as they turn away from their sins, believe in Jesus as the Christ, pledge to change their ways, and beg for forgiveness they can still see the Kingdom of Heaven even after committing the worst of atrocities. Does any part of you realize how wrong headed and unjust that is?

    Nohm is correct, society dictates morality Thomas, its why morales change over time. We no longer have slaves Thomas, we no longer have Jim Crow laws, we allow our women to speak in churches, and we even give them a right to vote. We allow gay couples to foster parent children who are homeless or stuck in orphanages without anyone to care for them. We don’t stone people to death for crimes, heck we don’t even hang people or give them the electric chair for high crimes. Why don’t we do these things anymore? Because the alternative is evil, unfair, or cruel as deemed by society. If we adhered strictly to the Bible, we’d still have slaves Thomas, it clearly tells us who we can take as slaves and how we are to treat slaves.

    Also Thomas, I would encourage you to post your sources, you listed a few passages from the Bible but insist there are many more. I would love to see them if you know them, post them.

    Also post your sources of how current dominant scientific theory is confirming Genesis? For example, we know the speed of light (299,792,458 metres per second in a vacuum) and with it we’ve been able to determine and confirm the distance between the Earth and the sun as well as other planets. We’ve also been able to determine the distance of distant stars in relation to the Earth. The light of the stars in the sky that we perceive originated from stars that are hundreds, thousands, millions, and even billions of light years away. If the universe was only 6000 years old distant stars wouldn’t shine in our night’s sky, they simply wouldn’t have had time to have their light reach our world.

    All I suggest Thomas is look beyond Living Waters for information, they are not the Bible, so don’t accept them as Gospel, there’s a lot of good passages in the Bible about loving thy neighbor and Do onto others that are good messages for humanity, but don’t be afraid of science, pick up a text book, or a couple of them. Watch a documentary about a specific subject like biology or physics if books are too boring to you. Learn a little more about real science, its not something to be taken on faith.

  68. To Thomas:

    Great job in your posts to Vintango and Nohm.
    You already know this but I wanted to say it anyways…

    When Jesus came performing miracles, raising the dead, walking on water, water into wine, they STILL crucified him. God himself walking on earth and yet his own brothers didn’t believe in him until after he was hung on the cross and rose again.

    Also the prophets were killed for their message.

    People love their sin and unless the Holy Spirit draws them we can spend the rest of our lives talking about these things with zero results.

    I know you know this already. I agree with you these discussions help sharpen our own faith and belief. That it isn’t just blind faith, requiring to check your brain at the door. Keep up the labor in the Lord. God Bless.

  69. @Dennis

    Jesus was crucified by people who never witnessed his miracles. How were they to know of his divine power when he never demonstrated it to him. As for why his apostles didn’t believe in his power. Again. There was no reason for them not to if they observed him performing feats like walking on water or turning water into wine, or creating many loaves and fishes, unless they just believed him to be a sorcerer or a magician. It was the bronze age after all, people believed in that sort of thing. Dennis, blind faith REQUIRES you to check your brain at the door, and so far many of the faithful here demonstrate it in spades. I would encourage you, as I’ve done with others to please investigate science claims, to better understand current and dominant scientific theory. Use a variety of sources if you’re skeptical of one. Our country is lagging behind the rest of the 1st world in key factors like science education. If we’re to improve our lives and the lives of others its important that we further our understanding of the natural world and the way it actually works.

  70. Thank you Dennis, I to want to commend you for you’re posts as well. It is sad to see such blind people but thankfully there are those out there who are open to the truth. People who’s heart’s are being worked on by the Holy Spirit. My prayer is that would happen to Vin, Nohm and all the rest who for now have set their lives against Jesus Christ. It is always possible, just like the Apostle Paul, that one day they will be proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Thanks again Dennis and God bless!

  71. I’m not against Jesus Thomas, his teachings about love, compassion, peace, and charity are common sense and are something to live by. What I am against are people who misrepresent facts intentionally, fundamentalists who are so blind or ignorant and devote that they can be talked into doing anything especially things like strapping bombs to their chests, and groups that exploit the Bible and Christianity to make a buck. Also Thomas I find it a little insulting that you imply that I’m blind when I ask you for the sources of your information and you willfully deny me, forcing me to stay blind.

  72. Hey Vin a few quick things-

    “[Jesus] his teachings about love, compassion, peace, and charity are common sense and are something to live by.”

    Well said Vin, I agree.

    “I am against are people who misrepresent facts intentionally, fundamentalists who are so blind or ignorant and devote that they can be talked into doing anything especially things like strapping bombs to their chests, and groups that exploit the Bible and Christianity to make a buck.”

    Well said Vin, I agree.

    “Also Thomas I find it a little insulting that you imply that I’m blind when I ask you for the sources of your information and you willfully deny me, forcing me to stay blind.”

    But Vin I DID give you sources for the information that I presented to you. You just DON’T like the sources. Now did I give sources for every jot and tittle for the information presented, no, but I did give sources for a lot of the major points I made.

    One other comment I would like to make about the accuracies in the Bible pertaining to science. The Bible is not technical when it comes to science. It doesn’t read like a science textbook, and because of that, I believe, that is where you are getting hung up.

    God bless and Merry Christmas!

  73. Yes your sourced the Bible as arguments for scientific fact… and you just shot down your own argument. The Bible isn’t scientific because its not technical, and it contains statements that we know aren’t scientific because they were written in the bronze age. Yet you defend them and you call me blind. You can’t go looking for science in the Bible Thomas you won’t find any, and if it were the ultimate source on the subject then the scientific revolution should have happened in the bronze age not the modern one. As it stands I believe I know why Genesis is in the Bible as opposed to just knowing why it should be removed from the Bible in this modern era.

  74. Vin I have enjoyed our debates. Much to think on and pray about. Here is a great Christmas message:

    He’s making a list, he’s checking it twice… he’s gonna find out who’s naughty or nice! If Santa used the Ten Commandments for his standard, how would you do? Let’s find out… Have you ever lied? Have you ever stolen anything? (No matter the value.) Ever used God’s name in vain? Ever hated anybody? The Bible says “Whoever hates his brother is a murderer.”

    If you are guilty of these things, it shows that in your heart, you are a lying, thieving, blasphemous, murderer-at-heart. Many people don’t know that God will use the Ten Commandments to judge the world. Forget about Santa, “naught” and “nice”… how will you do on Judgment Day? The Bible says, “But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed.” If you are found guilty on the day of wrath, that means an eternity in Hell.

    Two-thousand years ago, God sent Jesus to the earth to pay for your sins and my sins. That is what the true meaning of Christmas is, that God became a baby, that He became flesh in the man of Jesus Christ. The Bible says “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” Jesus lived the life that you and I could not live by living a perfect life before God and man. Then Jesus gave his life up for our salvation. When Jesus died on the cross, He took the punishment that you and I deserve for breaking His Law (The Ten Commandments). God’s wrath came down on Jesus, instead of on you and I. The Bible says, “God commands all men and women everywhere to repent, because God has appointed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness.”

    Please Remember if you try to get to Heaven on your own, you must keep every Commandment in thought, word, and deed! Jesus paid the penalty for your sins on the cross. Then he defeated the power of sin and death when He rose from the dead. Repent (turn away) from your sins. Place your faith in Jesus Christ alone to save you. God will grant you eternal life. Read your Bible daily and obey what you read.

    Merry Christmas Vin!

  75. Oye… okay Thomas, I guess the debate is over, thank you for repeating Living Waters to me almost word for word, I’ve heard their message before. I’m quite alright though, I was baptized into the Catholic faith and attend mass, I know about Jesus and have read the Bible, my intention for this debate was to refute Genesis, just as other gospels have been culled from the Bible for whatever reason in the past by the early Christian church I maintain the same can be done and IS being done.

    Masses that I have attended recently never mention Genesis or the more controversial passages from the Bible, because the church knows they’re incorrect or morally reprehensible, but yet dogma and common knowledge keeps people from throwing them out, because the church is unwilling to alter the Bible at this point in time as they did in history because the masses are better educated and Christianity has been around for a longer period of time.

    The reason Genesis exists is because its impossible to have a religion without an origin story. People eternally look for stability, patterns, and conclusions in what they see around them. From the very beginning man has tried to define the world and universe around them in terms they can understand, whether they’re real or not. Whether they’re FACTUAL or not. To a bronze age human, the idea of the universe, the world, the oceans, the animals, and people being whisked into existence over a matter of days seems entirely plausible given how difficult it is for a human who might live for 30 years to imagine a million or even a billions years of time passing before them. Creation stories exist in all the major religions and for a time they gave people a sense of stability, they KNEW how the universe was created and how it all got here, but they were not CORRECT. Imagine how the Navajo felt when there origin story about how 4 worlds were created and filled with spirits and monsters varied so wildly with the Genesis account?

    Even to this day we continue to learn more and more about the universe, reality, and our planet, but of all the things we learn, none of it supports the Biblical account of Genesis. If we ever do find evidence of a Garden of Eden, Adam, Eve, or a Tree of Knowledge, a Global Flood, Noah’s Ark, or the Tower of Babel, then we can reconsider Genesis but to this date we haven’t found anything. Christian scientists have striven for over a hundred years to search for physical evidence for biblical claims but have come up empty handed, and will most likely continue to be empty handed, because Genesis, like the Greek, Hindu, Krishna, Japanese, and Navajo origin stories, were recorded by people who did not know about science or the nature of the universe in general so it was impossible for them to be accurate or correct, or to even elaborate.

    In the bible we are told the world is held up on pillars… pillars of what? Stone? Marble? Air? Mountains? No elaboration, no real explanation, just a statement, easy for the common man of the age to understand but incorrect. That’s not good enough for us now, we’ve made scientific progress, we’ve learned about bacterium, about viruses, about how to sterilize equipment to increase our health, and further medical science. We’ve learned about radiation, about atoms, about waves, allowing us to create broadcast signals to send information over great distances. There are thousands upon thousands of breakthroughs that have been made because we chose to learn more about the universe rather then accept biblical stories as truth, and sadly to the dismay of a few people like you Thomas and the preachers over at Living Waters, they refuse let go of that sweet sweet dogma, because its such a crutch for you. Because you think that what Jesus teaches us about how to treat one another and how to live your life and how to be a good person can not come to pass if there wasn’t some original sin to stain us all, or if God didn’t create the world in 6 literal days, well guess what, we still all sin, we still all misbehave, that hasn’t and won’t change, so there will still always be some reason that we need to be redeemed, with or without Genesis being true or not.

  76. I have learned a lot from you Vin. The problem I see is that you are picking and choosing what you want to believe in the Bible. That can lead a person down a dangerous road. But again I have learned a lot, some things I agree with you on, but most I do not. Agree to disagree at this point. God bless and Happy New Year!!!

    P.S.—I do want to point out Vin that if Genesis is not accurate this undermines the entire Bible and it would be foolish for anyone to read and take to heart what the Bible is teaching. The reason for this is the Bible makes it clear that all Scripture is from the mind of God or God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16) and if what you are saying is correct than at best God doesn’t know what he is saying (no long God at that point, maybe a “god”) and at worst he is a liar. Just something to think about.

    P.S.S.—I do want to warn you Vin that from the time we have dialogued it seems you are breaking the second of the Ten Commandments which is idolatry (this is connected to what I said above about picking and choosing what you like in the Bible. This is connected to the sin of idolatry). You have created a “god” to conform to your life, a “god” that you are conformable with and that doesn’t demand anything from anybody in the end. Also this “god” has no connection to reality because this “god” did not have anything to do with creation. This “god” that you have created in you’re mind Vin does not exist. I am not saying this in a prideful, “I’m better than you” attitude. As much as you will not like to hear it, you must, I don’t want you or anyone I have met to go to hell. Please heed what I am saying and check yourself, this is serious. Repent of this sin (all sin in your life) and trust Jesus Christ for your salvation. God bless Vin!

    • And you don’t pick and choose?

      • Correct. Thomas picks and chooses just like every Christian throughout history.

        Speaking personally, I can respect a theist who portrays his/her faith as a search for truth, an attempt to live life correctly. A Christian who does this concedes that parts of the Bible make sense while others shouldn’t be taken literally.

        What I *can’t* respect are theists who claim that others pick and choose from the words in their book, while ignoring the fact that they do this themselves. I wonder if Thomas believs that bird’s blood will cleanse a house of leprosy.

        By the same token, I can be very respectful of a religious holiday even if I’m skeptical of the details. The symbolism of Christmas includes things I approve of: charity, kindness, being thankful for what you’ve got, etc.

        Merry Christmas folks.

  77. I hate reruns.

  78. Let’s see who the real liars are according to the Bible:

    If the Bible isn’t considered (by Christians) to be an authority on cosmology, geology or meteorology, why should anyone else consider it an authority on lying?

  79. Boy what difference a year can make…. speaking of liars… I could think of a few other L words like laminin we could talk about =)

  80. WOW! There is a lot of good dialogue and information on here I had forgotten how much was discussed on here a year ago! Save this Pastor Steve! Merry CHRISTmas!!!

  81. Tommy,

    how can you being an atheist (I am assuming you are an atheist from your writings)…

    (Can’t speak for vin, but I’m agnostic – just so you know)

    …claim anything can be good or evil? An atheist has no moral ground to stand on, really how can you claim that anything is good or evil in the first place. Would you agree that murder and rape, for example, are evil? I am assuming you would agree but my question is WHY are they evil? What makes those acts evil?

    Really, do you even read what anybody here types? We’ve been over and over this.

    Why is it that every society, all throughout history (Christian or non-), has some version of “the Golden Rule”? Why do you assume that Buddhist societies rape and murder each other randomly? At what point have you found any evidence for this?

    The guiding principle of morality is empathy; what differs are our approaches to that principle, and how we interpret our feelings of empathy in order to make a coherent system.

    Human beings are social animals; we are tribal, fundamentally speaking, and it is this which forms the basis of human morality. It also forms the idea of justice: through our empathy for other humans, we seek to mete out punishment to wrongdoers on the same level of seriousness as the crimes they have committed.

    The only difference between people is how they codify and rationalise this morality, and attempt to apply it in rational terms to the way they live. As well as being emotionally-led creatures, we’re also afflicted, as a species, with a curiosity which would put cats to shame. This is what, in my opinion, ultimately leads to us assigning causes to things, whether through frustration at not knowing (Religion); or through reasoned and rational methods (Science). It is also the foundation of reasoning and rationality; it’s a great deal easier to find out how things work if you use a consistent system of thought, whether intentionally or not.

    We attempt to apply our curiosity and the reasoning engendered by it onto everything, which is where we frequently fall into trouble.

    Empathy is an inherently subjective emotion. We feel empathy to different degrees according to our relationships with people; mostly for our families or those with the closest emotional bonds to us, then to other members of the ‘tribe’, and finally to outsiders.

    Is that clear yet?

  82. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if I was surrounded by Muslims or Hindus or so on, or if there were a wide variety of Islamic websites that allowed comments from atheists, then I’d be discussing these issues with them also.

    It’s not just about Christianity, but I live in the U.S., and that’s what I primarily interact with.

    Plus, Muslims tend to not be cool with atheists posting comments on their sites. Believe me, I know.

  83. Hello Nameless is your current post directed toward me?

    • It surely was. Hence the first two (relatively) full paragraphs were quotes from you. (Yeah, the second was supposed to be italicized too – HTML is hard…)

      Admittedly, they were pointed at anyone who insists on spreading the same slander about non-believers, simply because either you never thought through the subject, or because you believe that Jesus wants you to lie. But you are the primary target.

      • Very interesting. But still the question lingers, is right and wrong absolute?

        P.S.—Nameless you said, “Why is it that every society, all throughout history (Christian or non-), has some version of ‘the Golden Rule’? Why do you assume that Buddhist societies rape and murder each other randomly? At what point have you found any evidence for this?”

        Don’t quite understand why this is here but every society has an understanding of right and wrong. This is because all peoples have a conscience that has been given by God.

        P.S.S.—I can tell you with 100% assurance that if I’m in the wrong it is because I have not in your words “thought through the subject” but never because “Jesus wants [me] to lie.” If I’m wrong at some point it is my fault not the fault of the Bible and/or Christ. Am I capable of lying, sadly yes, do I want to lie absolutely not! I want and always strive for the truth with God’s help.

        P.S.S.S.—I would appreciate it if you would not call me Tommy please. Tom will work but I do prefer Thomas. Please understand my tone I’m not angry it is just a out of curiosity if you would please.

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.