Atheist Fallacies

[Churchwork]

We should distinguish between Jesus the Word and the Bible. Jesus never claimed to be written letters. God gave the Bible as intended, and man can make a copying mistake certainly, but don't you think it makes more sense to discuss the ultimate proof of God which is His resurrection before discussing a million and one other matters? So far from what I can tell you can find no naturalistic explanation for the resurrection that fits the data.

I have no reason to believe something in the Bible didn't happen, nor do you.

You're missing the point about the lottery. It's called preponderance of evidence. As the days and years go by we find more causes and still no reason to think something happens all by itself. The trend is away from something happening all by itself in nature. The lottery is not you being told what number to pick but observing trillions of scenarios we know of that have causes verses your faith in which you have no evidence for. We often know the cause. There are trillions of things in nature with a cause and nothing to be shown without a cause, so the odds are against you more than a trillion to one.

You want to compare if a particular nation in Africa was enslaved longer than Israel was of over 430 years? Go ahead find your evidence. The burden is on you, since you brought it up. At the time of God choosing a nation to usher in the Messiah, nobody prior to Israel's inception was enslaved longer.

The point about Israel is it has become quite fruitful, has vast unused reservoirs of water, surrounded by desert. Jesus is not going to reign from a desert. The location agrees in religio-historical context. California does not have this obvious context.

God speaks to people according their known world. That is perfectly reasonable as the flood. It's not that hard to understand. You are just placing an unethical legalism like you are a bad lawyer trying to get off on a loophole. That shows your heart is not being genuine to the time and place.

As a percentage of the population, the bombings in Japan did not eat away into the total population as a whole as much as did wars in the past. You're not thinking right. Look at the numbers of the total population.

[DD2014]

He showed Himself to you by proof of the resurrection which you admit you can't find a naturalistic explanation that fits the data.

What data? where is your "data" that suggests that Jesus was resurrected??? Because I would love to see it.

He says if He were to pop up in front of you, you would still find an excuse. Besides He is a realistic God and doesn't perform childish parlor tricks for your selfish demands. Think He would have to do that for everyone, therefore, that is unrealistic.

Unrealistic how? Didn't you say he is God? He can do anything? Why not just talk to everyone at the same time? Christians always say God can do anything, but he does nothing. If he created the universe then why can't he do alittle astral projection? I don't think that is unresonable if he really loves us and made the universe as a place for us to live like you Christians are always preaching, where is the logic in that? If he put all this effort into us why not just say "I'm God, if you accept me then you can go to heaven"

And I don't think wanting to know if someone that you are expected follow unquestionally actually exists is unresonable or selfish. I honestly think that if you live your life by what this person says, you better know WITHOUT A DOUBT that this person is real.

You actually never believed in God because the Bible teaches once-saved-always-saved. Do you see the logic in that statement? Christianity has no assumptions, whereas science has some assumptions I agree. Christians have evidence by the resurrection which you are not abiding in that physical evidence of the eyewitness accounts. So you are not abiding in your own historicity and science.

Well if I belived once-saved-always-saved in the past, then I did belive once. Now that I know that it is not true I no longer belive it. So I did belive in God once.

If the physical evidence you are talking about are 4 eyewitnes accounts that were writen down 30-100 years after they happened then those are not credible accounts. So what you are trying to say is that you do not assume that those untimely accounts are true? Because that is what you are doing (or being doubleminded). And if you must put your faith on something that is baced on an assumption then you cannot know for 100% sure that is is true.

p.s. Use the spell checker, don't be lazy.

I actually have been, but I don't get alot of sleep so sometimes I won't notice if I screw up. But I'll try harder

[Churchwork]

There are 8 things about the resurrection claim of Jesus accepted by most skeptical scholars and 3 main responses usually given. Only the third choice makes any sense.

C. S. Lewis said God gives you ample evidence of proof of His existence and just enough obscurity so that you can reject Him. But if He came and coerced everyone into salvation, then where is the free will in that? Think of it from God's perspective. He wants your genuine choice, not a forced belief upon you. With Lazarus and the Rich Man, the Rich Man told Abraham to go tell his brothers about the bad side of Hades he was in to prevent them from going where he is at in that terrible place. Abraham responded by saying, they won't believe him if they don't even believe the prophets that warned about this. Likewise, Jesus said how can you accept Him if you can't even accept the prophets before who told about His coming? Do you really think performing parlor tricks for everyone in just the way they want to convince them is a righteous thing or proper realistic way for God's kingdom of born-again believers? Of course not. It's not real, but just coerced. God can't do anything, for He can't go against His righteous nature and perform unethical tricks like a dog for you. He already condescended Himself when He died on the cross. What more do you want? God will not give into your demands, but you have a choice to give into His mercy and grace.

Since Jesus came, walked the earth, ministered for 3 years and resurrected, what better proof is there than this? So to reject the ultimate proof would be selfish on your part, because you still can't find a naturalistic explanation to explain away the resurrection which can fit the above data.

You never believed in once-saved-always-saved otherwise you would abide in it forever. What you believe is called non-OSAS, but that is not Biblical. You may have apparently believed OSAS, but at the end of the day it was still misreading the Bible as ultimately non-OSAS, and you have not entered into the the salvation given in God's Word as OSAS.

By reading the 8 reasons above, you will see that the creeds are not later developments, but right on top of the events of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. To assume that they are written decades later is just assumed on your part. There is no reason to think these writings could not have been jotted down as soon as the events happened.

The intense persecution of Christians made it difficult to transmit documents. Watch the movie, Paul the Apostle to get a sense of how difficult it was. It's a miracle we have as many documents as we have. Even so, nobody is more well documented in antiquity than Jesus, so lack of information is no valid excuse. The documents and early parchments we still have are closer to the events of Christ than are for any other historical figure, so you can't use the excuse they are late dated. Nor do you have evidence for any such late datings. Why assume?

[DD2014]

He wants your genuine choice, not a forced belief upon you. Do you really think performing parlor tricks for everyone in just the way they want to convince them is a righteous thing or proper realistic way for God's kingdom of born-again believers? Of course not. It's not real, but just coerced. God can't do anything, for He can't go against His righteous nature and perform unethical tricks like a dog for you.

Honestly what you said in this quote makes more sense then anything that has been said to me in the last year or two.

I am not going to try to find any fault in this because your reasoning is rock hard and without error.

In this point I surrender to your logic and I will be thinking about this for some time.

Thanks for being tolerant of me and my beliefs. And I thank you even more for all your posts and answers to my questions

Hopefully your friend,
Robert...