Lawrence Krauss, Richard Carrier vs. Frank Turek 10 Reasons Why the NT is True

[Parture]

Who or what are you slave to?

This is awesome! Have the courage to listen to this (all of it) and think eyes and heart wide open like you have never listened before.

http://saddleback.com/mc/m/5e22f/ (http://saddleback.com/mc/m/5e22f/)

This is your moment.

Lawrence Krauss is brain dead. He said non-existence split into matter and anti matter or positive and negative charges so everything cancels everything out to zero or nothing. How does something begin to split to exist if it doesn't exist?

Lawrence Krauss is going to Hell. He's a bad guy! Do you want to be like him? What's worse than choosing to be and being eternally separated from your Creator?

[LoLord]

I only joined to briefly address this ghastly post of yours. You grossly misrepresent Krauss's argument(s) here. If you do not know how Lawrence Krauss accounts for the emergence of the universe (how something came from a 0 energy value), then you did not pay much attention to his argument. Given the remarkably vacuous and ill-informed nature of your criticism of Krauss's argument(s), all I can say is that if Krauss is in any way 'brain dead', then you can be little better than 'brainless'. Common sense should tell you to familiarise yourself with an argument before attempting a rebuke.

You do not know that there is any Creator; you believe there is one. Wishing suffering to come upon someone who is trying to understand the nature of the universe, and who wishes to spread knowledge is to be no better than any demon to ever be mentioned in the Biblical narrative. For this reason I find it humourous that you believe Lawrence Krauss is a 'bad guy'. You ought to read what you posted. You may delete my post if you wish.

[Parture]

I am glad you couldn't show any misrepresentation so you must be misrepresenting. Your wishful thinking there is no Creator is not a valid argument. Indeed, Krauss is brainless to think something can come from nothing. Familiarize yourself with the argument in the link then tackle my response. Suffice it to say that which does not exist still can't cause anything because it doesn't exist. Non-existence will never split into anything for that which doesn't exist can't split. A cause is required from something. Praise God we have proof of God, because infinite regress is impossible otherwise you would have already happened having had an alleged eternity to do so; so nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated. This uncreated Creator is whom we call God. You and Krauss are the bad people bound for Hell because you refuse God's saving grace. You can't cease to exist since you're made in God's image; His image never ceases to exist. There is no rest day or night for those going to Hell. You're without excuse because Jesus is proven to be God by the resurrection appearances for which there is no viable naturalistic explanation which there ought to be one if your theory is true. For example, group hallucinations and swoon theory fail. And people don't willingly die for what they know is a lie. So the Apostles truly believed that Jesus rose from the dead.

In your sin nature you prefer to remain selfish, independent, disobedient and self-centered which eternally separates yourself from God because God can have no fellowship with a sinner. You have chosen to eternally separate yourself from God so you are most certainly going to Hell. Why complain about it since that is what you want? Don't be doubleminded about it. This would be punishment for Christians to go with you to Hell for we love God, but when you are in Hell you will be right at home where you want to be where you belong, locking yourself in Hell from the inside. Whatever punishment that entails, you would prefer that than to be showered with the love of God in a place of perfect sinlessness, holiness and immaculate dwelling. According to you it would be a punishment to be with God which is of course demented for God is maximally great! Who can exceed God's greatness? It certainly would be punishment for believers to have you in our presence for eternity future when you despise God. There are no tortured souls in the New City and New Earth in eternity future.

How can a loving God allow you to be with His people who are without sin? What love is that? God is righteous and just so you must be separated from God's chosen people. If we we have to lock up some people in prison for life, how can you not be locked up in Hell for eternity? Romans 1.20 tells us that you are without excuse for just by observing nature we know God exists. Everyone knows this though many may shut their minds down as you do allowing demonic entry to possess them as zombies for Satan. Trying to understand the intricacies of nature in all its facets is not some worthy pursuit that saves you. Study nature as it magnifies God's glory, but the work of learning about nature will never redeem you. That would be a vain pursuit. Salvation is not by works lest any man should boast. Learning about the variables and constants of nature will never be a valid excuse for rejecting Jesus as your Lord and Savior. You're still a sinner that needs to be saved. Since you don't want to be saved, surely you will go to Hell according to John chapter 3.

Understand that nothing you do can save you apart from giving your life to Christ. God knows your decrepit nature that you are fallen man. You sin and are selfish everyday. So in His divine providence He enters His creation to pay the penalty that belongs to you. All you need do is simply accept the payment that He pays as the ransom for the sins of the world. This is how He makes you right before Him so you can come before Him cleansed by the precious blood for forgiveness of sins. It is so simple anyone can be saved whosoever is willing to believe in Jesus so as not to perish but receives eternal life.

Once saved, you can never lose eternal life (John 10.28). And though you may still sin or be selfish at times, God is perfecting you as you actively participate to overcome so one day you will be permanently without sin and selfishness. Praise the Lord! If this is a life you want then give your life to Christ.

My prayer is one day you give your life to Christ and not go with Satan, Antichrist, False Prophet, fallen angels and demons to Hell. The choice remains none other than yours.

[LoLord]

More rubbish. Let me deconstruct your post one point at a time. Remember, you have made the claim against Krauss's work, not me. If you do not understand how a universe can come from a situation with 0 energy, then you did not pay attention to his work. He clearly specifies how this would occur, and the fact that you missed it (somehow) wreaks of biased interpretation and selective hearing / reading. If you want to find out how a universe could come from such a situation, read his work before trying to refute it. This is very poor on your part. You then say non-existence cannot split into anything, but this is ambiguous because Lawrence Krauss's theory simply explains how the 'Laws of Physics' can create matter and positive / negative energy. When he says nothing, he means immaterial and energy-less. Quantum fluctuations actively do split 0 energy situations, and we can see this even in empty space. Along event horizons, sometimes they split in such a way that they do not destroy one another, but are split apart and both remain in existence. This is common knowledge in Quantum Physics. Furthermore, my argument was not that there is no Creator, I simply pointed out that there is no good evidence to assert that one exists. There is a big difference, and you have yet again either missed it, or deliberately misrepresented my argument. Very poor again.

You then say everything needs a cause. This is yet another premature assumption you have made. Leave physics to the people who study it. We do not know that everything on a cosmic scale requires causation. In fact, an infinite regress is not impossible at all; it is merely counterintuitive, just like infinite quantities. If God exists, then by your logic, He must have existed forever backwards without causation. Given that you have no grounds by your own reasoning to make such a claim, then the same claim can be made of natural phenomena. What you say about nature needing a Creator outside of time and space is particularly vacuous, seeing as the Big Bang, as we all understand it, created the time and space we have come to know anyway. In this respect, something outside of time and space (and space-time thereby) did create everything. What creates quantum fluctuations is a better question. Saying that the universe must have had an uncreated Creator in a situation where all things need causes (as you say) is not only illogical, but it really just leaves you with a God of the Gaps argument. You simply posit God in place of scientific ignorance. When the universe is understood better - and we understand it more and more with each passing day - then your argument will only ever look increasingly naïve.

You then say I am a bad person. But what have I done which is bad? You have misrepresented a man's scientific work and said he is going to Hell. I merely put you in your place, and let you know that paying attention to someone's words should be a prerequisite for any rebuke. Given your naïve condemnation of Krauss and I, it would be fair to say that if either of us (Krauss and I) are doomed to reside in Hell, then you will be joining us. Save divine judgement for God; it is not your liberty. If Christianity turns out to be true, God will make his case, not you. If He favours credulity over critical inquiry, then I will gladly live for eternity separated from Him.

Next, you say Jesus was proven to be God by the resurrection. Laughable logic on your part yet again. Rising from the dead does not prove that someone is a God. Often we have found scratch-marks on the interiors of coffins of people who were pronounced 'deceased' by medical experts. Seemingly rising from the dead is no divine task; at best it would only suggest he has one remarkable ability. Perhaps though, he was just comatose or ostensibly dead, when in fact he was not. His other miracles provide better testimony. Jesus being 'resurrected' implies that there was a 'Resurrector'. That Resurrector would more likely be the God, than the Resurrected. Common sense there. Beside this though, there are some fantastic books covering your points here: 'The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave'; 'Not the Impossible Faith: Why Christianity did not Need a Miracle to Succeed'; 'On the Historicity of Jesus: Why we Might have Reason for Doubt'. If you feel like challenging yourself, those books are a lot more accessibly written (i.e., for laypeople). Jesus was a 'revealed' / 'revelatory' being, and so it made sense that people would follow him. Paul and Philo made it clear that Jesus was not a 'man' - at least to begin with - but a celestial being who revealed himself to people through visions and revelations. The scholarly community at current has not made any well grounded conclusion that Jesus ever existed as a man. He might well have existed, but we just do not have enough evidence to safely conclude this.

As for calling me self-centred and disobedient, this is a funny point. You seem proud of your credulity, and note that I will be going to Hell for these things, while you will ascend. But that suggests that all that you do on Earth is done with a reward in sight (as well as an active avoidance of eternal punishment). That sounds a little bit selfish to me. What I do, I do because I believe it is right, and this is exactly what you do. You have no high-ground to speak from; especially given the credulity required to get you to where you are. Furthermore, God is not without sin, and the Old Testament makes this perfectly clear. He even concedes having made a moral error in the story of Noah's Arc, in which He murdered countless people and animals just because He wanted praise (remember God's proceeding promise). Had you bothered to read the Old Testament you would know this perfectly well. If you say God can do whatever He wants and cannot be wrong, then you have just constructed a self-fulfilling, hypocritical prophecy. Being an atheist does not necessitate being selfish or cruel, it only means one does not believe in God. You can know nothing else about an atheist apart from that he / she does not believe in God. An atheist could me morally / ethically identical to you, but just derive his ethics and morality from elsewhere. Again, this really is common sense, and the fact that you failed here too is demonstrative of hatred for people who do not share your credulousness. You speak passionately about those going to Hell to the point where - as a psychologist - I would almost be ready to call it psychopathy. By definition, your words are psychopathic; this is no ad hominem on my part.

You quote Romans, but perhaps you will respond better to the words of Jesus, whom you are disobeying with your hideous comments: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust." - Matthew 5:43-45 (ESV). It is painful listening to people live by a Holy book which they obviously have not read. If Jesus speaks truth, then your words are in disagreement with truth. You are not to condemn people, you are to forgive and try to show them the way, and pray for them. Telling them they are damned and selfish is never going to make anyone admire you nor your beliefs. You make Christianity look unsavoury and sour, like nothing more than scriptural barbarism. Your Lord would hardly be impressed.

All knowledge we have points to life being finite and natural. Even if there is a God, He as not provided us with any good proof to the contrary. Would any God truly appreciate people wanting eternal life, as though they were unable to appreciate the lengthy - though finite - one they had been given? I do not wish to have eternal life; I wish to have what is given. Your greed for eternity and excitement at the suffering of those who disagree with you is testimony to self-centredness in its purest form. Indifference to human suffering and dissatisfaction with life as we have come to know it. Perhaps I can humble you by reminding you... Rarely does one ever deserve better, if he is unwilling to settle for less. Do good deeds and care for other beings, and if there is a God, you will be rewarded. Hatred and indifference will only grant you pass into the place you fear the most, and you know where that is.

It is always saddening to see people in an age of science and reason speaking like people from 5, 000 years ago. You really ought to rethink your worldview, as you sound more like you are preaching fundamentalist Islam, than Christianity (read the Qur'an and look at how similar your words are to those of Muhammad). I have no reason to pledge my life to Christ, as I have no evidence he existed. Claims in an ancient book are not good enough, and any intelligent Creator would know this. You may say Christ died for my sins, but I do not believe in vicarious redemption. My sins are my own and I would never let anyone else suffer for them, and just say 'thanks' for it. I will live and die by my own actions, and Jesus (if he exists) is not entitled to my sins; they are my own and I will redeem myself in whatever way I see fit. If you feel at ease with thinking someone else was killed for you, then by all means... ...

As for you offer of eternity... Like I said, I do not desire it. I am content with what I have, and am humbled in knowing it is not eternal. If you cannot see the beauty in what is finite, then what chance have you of treasuring each day in infinity? This finite life is not something I can afford to pledge to the words in a book full of contradictions and (what I believe are) evil creeds. You are free to do so, and as long as you treat others well and fairly (unlike what your words here suggest you do), then I have no problem with you believing any of these things. Just don't go around criticising people you don't understand, or telling people they will burn for not being credulous. You can pray for me if you wish, but in return I can only offer you my pity; my thoughts at best.

[LoLord]

I forgot to address one final point of yours. You noted that a man is not defined by his works alone, and this is a true statement according to the Bible; though you ought to recall Jesus praising the 'good Samaritan', who could not have been Christian because he did not know of the religion. However, a huge hole is that it must be better to search for answers than to declare them in ignorance; which is what you do. Any scripture can claim that our faith is more important than knowledge, and lead us into behaviours which are incredibly foolish (e.g., paying money to ascend through the levels of freedom, as is the case in Scientology). Your claim that people would not die for untruth is particularly dubious. By this logic, Islamic extremists must be convinced by truth because they are pledging their lives to Allah and dying for his cause.

When we look around us, there is no 'evidence' that a Deity exists because most such things can be explained by science appealing to natural processes. Even life is slowly becoming understandable in scientific terms, and scientists have been able to create amino-acids / self-replicators in laboratory settings, which is a huge step towards unravelling the mystery of biogenesis. You can close your eyes, your heart, and your mind to these developments, but that is your prerogative; no one can force you to rise from credulity. While one's pursuit of knowledge may not be enough to redeem him, it is better than making ignorant claims. The former is much more honest, though Psalms 14:1 would have it that any nonbeliever doing anything is futile. Given this, I hope you do not use too many modern medicines, as there are a great many atheists in the scientific community, trying to discover cures for diseases that God so lovingly provided us with. The problem with asserting that our works and investigations are inferior to faith, as is suggested in Ephesians 2:8-10 (ESV) is that the claim that we ourselves are evidence of God's glory, and that we need only have faith, are claims made my numerous scriptures (e.g., the Qur'an repeatedly makes this dubious claim). Your faith is little more justified than any other, and yet you are so confident that you will dismiss them as fools (an amusing position).

[Parture]

More rubbish. Let me deconstruct your post one point at a time. Remember, you have made the claim against Krauss's work, not me. If you do not understand how a universe can come from a situation with 0 energy, then you did not pay attention to his work. He clearly specifies how this would occur, and the fact that you missed it (somehow) wreaks of biased interpretation and selective hearing / reading. If you want to find out how a universe could come from such a situation, read his work before trying to refute it. This is very poor on your part. You then say non-existence cannot split into anything, but this is ambiguous because Lawrence Krauss's theory simply explains how the 'Laws of Physics' can create matter and positive / negative energy. When he says nothing, he means immaterial and energy-less. Quantum fluctuations actively do split 0 energy situations, and we can see this even in empty space. Along event horizons, sometimes they split in such a way that they do not destroy one another, but are split apart and both remain in existence. This is common knowledge in Quantum Physics. Furthermore, my argument was not that there is no Creator, I simply pointed out that there is no good evidence to assert that one exists. There is a big difference, and you have yet again either missed it, or deliberately misrepresented my argument. Very poor again.
Krauss did not show something can come from nothing. It was just assumed. To show that you are not understanding as your explanation you wrote, "Laws of Physics can create matter." Physics laws are part of nature, they are not non-existence. There is nothing in quantum mechanics to make you believe non-existence can create or split something from nothing. Empty space is not nothing. It is something for it has particles. Energy is not destroyed as you assumed. That violates the laws of thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. You keep avoiding the evidence for God already laid out in Rom. 1.20 by observing nature we prove God's existence. To repeat yet again. Infinite regress is impossible, because if it were true, you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so, so nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated. And self-contradictorily, you should never have come into being because a past eternity would continue on for eternity never reaching this point; hence, nature needs a cause outside itself. This uncreated Creator is what were refer to when we say God. Also, nature can't start up from nothing, for that which does not exist, as we have seen, can't cause anything, can't split into something, for it does not exist. Try to address this. Typically what someone does in your position is continue to try to skirt around these facts, but they remain solid.


You then say everything needs a cause. This is yet another premature assumption you have made. Leave physics to the people who study it. We do not know that everything on a cosmic scale requires causation. In fact, an infinite regress is not impossible at all; it is merely counterintuitive, just like infinite quantities. If God exists, then by your logic, He must have existed forever backwards without causation. Given that you have no grounds by your own reasoning to make such a claim, then the same claim can be made of natural phenomena. What you say about nature needing a Creator outside of time and space is particularly vacuous, seeing as the Big Bang, as we all understand it, created the time and space we have come to know anyway. In this respect, something outside of time and space (and space-time thereby) did create everything. What creates quantum fluctuations is a better question. Saying that the universe must have had an uncreated Creator in a situation where all things need causes (as you say) is not only illogical, but it really just leaves you with a God of the Gaps argument. You simply posit God in place of scientific ignorance. When the universe is understood better - and we understand it more and more with each passing day - then your argument will only ever look increasingly naïve.
There is no assumption in stating everything in nature needs a cause, for there is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt since we observe trillions of cause and effects in nature, and no hard evidence of something from nothing. So you don't need to be God to know all things, nor is it even possible for you to know all things and be God. God never at any point not know all things like you. It is enough to know that you have an overwhelming preponderance of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt nature always has a cause, and no hard evidence to the contrary. Saying something is counterintuitive doesn't make it so. You still have to address the problem with your infinite regress theory; namely, if there was an infinite regress you would have had an eternity to come into being before now, so you should have already happened. And you should never have existed because a past eternity would continue to go on forever thus, never reaching this point. While you can have infinite numbers, you can't have infinite regress. Since nature can't always have existed, it needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space. This is whom God is outside of time and space. It's actually illogical to place God's ultimate existence in an infinite regress time setting, because that is not what we refer to when we speak of God. You are arguing against something else, but our discussion is about God. We speak of God as being outside of time and space. He is the Creator of time and space. The big bang you admitted created time and space. Why shut your mind down to what caused the big bang, for obviously it did not start up from nothing and nor did it always exist. You admitted now that "something outside time and space did created everything" in nature including its "space-time". That's what we are referring to when we speak of God. God is the creator outside of time and space who brings time and space into being. You're contradicting yourself because you argued for infinite regress of nature then turn around and say that which is outside of nature, outside of time and space, brought nature into being so infinite regress would not be true. The Bible says be "not doubletongued" (1 Tim. 3.8). A person with a double mind is a dishonest one.

It's illogical to say nature doesn't need a cause, because you already admitted it was caused by that which is outside of time and space; so it did not always exist. What created QM and nature are equally valid questions for both are part of nature and their ultimate existence is that which is outside of QM and nature. This fact never changes. No matter how much you know this remains constant as per the overwhelming evidence. The more science you learn, in fact, makes your naïve doubletongue seem ever more ridiculous! The fact remains, nature could not always have existed, nor start up from nothing. Therefore, that which is outside of time and space is the ultimate cause whom we refer to as God. There is no gap: Step 1 - God created; Step 2 - big bang explodes. There is not an infinite number of events, but a finite number, from whence God created and the big bang exploded. Don't be naïve.


You then say I am a bad person. But what have I done which is bad? You have misrepresented a man's scientific work and said he is going to Hell. I merely put you in your place, and let you know that paying attention to someone's words should be a prerequisite for any rebuke. Given your naïve condemnation of Krauss and I, it would be fair to say that if either of us (Krauss and I) are doomed to reside in Hell, then you will be joining us. Save divine judgement for God; it is not your liberty. If Christianity turns out to be true, God will make his case, not you. If He favours credulity over critical inquiry, then I will gladly live for eternity separated from Him.
What have you done that is bad? You sinned and you were selfish which is hurtful to you and to others. God has no sin so He can have no fellowship with you in your current condition. Science proves you are going to Hell. Since science proves God's existence don't trust science so falsely called -- that you make up! "Avoid profane vain babblings, and oppositions of science so falsely called" (1 Tim. 6.20 (http://biblia.com/bible/asv/1%20Tim.%206.20)). What you call science, scientists claim is false science on your part. Scientifically, no naturalistic explanation exists for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles. Therefore, Jesus is God and Jesus spoke on Hell more than anyone, so Hell is true, and you are going to Hell because you are a bad! I am sure bad people don't think they are bad, but they most certainly are, delusionally. According to the Bible I won't be joining you in Hell as the Bible promises that is impossible, because I am redeemed by the precious blood of Christ which can never be taken away. According to your own standards you admit you would belong in Hell for you were unable to provide from Krauss how something can come from nothing which is understandable, because he wasn't able to do it. He just self-proclaimed it. Also, you misunderstand salvation. Whatever your sin may be, salvation is received by accepting Christ, not by assuming Krauss proved something. You need not worry. God does not favor credulity over critical inquiry, for He said "prove all things, hold to that which is good" (1 Thess. 5.21). Perhaps you thought you were doing the first part while forgetting the latter. Remember, you are not going to Hell because of your credulity, but because you are too selfish to repent to the cross as a helpless sinner to receive the Lord Jesus as Savior.


Next, you say Jesus was proven to be God by the resurrection. Laughable logic on your part yet again. Rising from the dead does not prove that someone is a God. Often we have found scratch-marks on the interiors of coffins of people who were pronounced 'deceased' by medical experts. Seemingly rising from the dead is no divine task; at best it would only suggest he has one remarkable ability. Perhaps though, he was just comatose or ostensibly dead, when in fact he was not. His other miracles provide better testimony. Jesus being 'resurrected' implies that there was a 'Resurrector'. That Resurrector would more likely be the God, than the Resurrected. Common sense there. Beside this though, there are some fantastic books covering your points here: 'The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave'; 'Not the Impossible Faith: Why Christianity did not Need a Miracle to Succeed'; 'On the Historicity of Jesus: Why we Might have Reason for Doubt'. If you feel like challenging yourself, those books are a lot more accessibly written (i.e., for laypeople). Jesus was a 'revealed' / 'revelatory' being, and so it made sense that people would follow him. Paul and Philo made it clear that Jesus was not a 'man' - at least to begin with - but a celestial being who revealed himself to people through visions and revelations. The scholarly community at current has not made any well grounded conclusion that Jesus ever existed as a man. He might well have existed, but we just do not have enough evidence to safely conclude this.
Rising from the dead does, indeed, prove one is God since nobody has ever risen from the dead of his own accord on the 3rd day. Jesus rose from the dead of His own accord. He testified to that fact. Scratch marks in coffins are not claims of a person coming back to life for they had not been verified as dead for 3 days. You need to think this through properly. When Jesus resurrected, He did not resurrect all tattered and torn, scourged down to the bone, holes in His hands and feet and chest. He was observed with His resurrected body, a new imperishable body. Stating Jesus being resurrected is not based on implying it, for His resurrection was proven by the eyewitness testimonies which you can't find a naturalistic explanation for. Group hallucinations are impossible. I recommend you read the award winning "The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus" (2004) by Gary R. Habermas. Challenge yourself. it addresses all the silly nonsense in those silly books you cited. It is the best book I believe comprehensively providing the resurrection proof. The resurrection proof is better than other types of miracles because it was so multiply attested. People didn't follow Jesus on merely some revelation, but it was their eyewitness testimony. With eyes they did see. Jesus said, further, how blessed are those who believe and did not see. Paul never considered Jesus anything other than a man, the same man whom Peter, James and John testified to Paul in 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2. Seeing Jesus on the road to Damascus was seen by others with him. They all fell to the ground. So it was not some personal revelation. Jesus really died on a physical cross physically. Jesus is the most documented person in antiquity more than any 10 figures combined within 150 years of their deaths. There is virtually no non-Christian scholars who consider Jesus other than a historical figure. If the most documented person in antiquity is not enough evidence, giving your even more testimonies to the same will not help you, because evidence is not your primary concern since the Bible has already exceeded all expectations and historical standards.


As for calling me self-centred and disobedient, this is a funny point. You seem proud of your credulity, and note that I will be going to Hell for these things, while you will ascend. But that suggests that all that you do on Earth is done with a reward in sight (as well as an active avoidance of eternal punishment). That sounds a little bit selfish to me. What I do, I do because I believe it is right, and this is exactly what you do. You have no high-ground to speak from; especially given the credulity required to get you to where you are. Furthermore, God is not without sin, and the Old Testament makes this perfectly clear. He even concedes having made a moral error in the story of Noah's Arc, in which He murdered countless people and animals just because He wanted praise (remember God's proceeding promise). Had you bothered to read the Old Testament you would know this perfectly well. If you say God can do whatever He wants and cannot be wrong, then you have just constructed a self-fulfilling, hypocritical prophecy. Being an atheist does not necessitate being selfish or cruel, it only means one does not believe in God. You can know nothing else about an atheist apart from that he / she does not believe in God. An atheist could me morally / ethically identical to you, but just derive his ethics and morality from elsewhere. Again, this really is common sense, and the fact that you failed here too is demonstrative of hatred for people who do not share your credulousness. You speak passionately about those going to Hell to the point where - as a psychologist - I would almost be ready to call it psychopathy. By definition, your words are psychopathic; this is no ad hominem on my part.
You are still not understanding that no man is saved by works lest anyone should boast. Salvation is not based on rewards, but simply receiving the gospel of salvation that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of the world that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but receive everlasting life. Your disobedience is rejecting God's redemptive solution. Why would you think it is selfish to give your life to Christ? To give it all to Him, dependence on your Creator, is the selfless act of salvation. I have the high ground and authority because I am in Christ. You are on the low ground because indwelling your spirit is Satan. The gates of Hell can not come against those in Christ -- His Church, the body of Christ. You are powerless to usurp God's children, because Satan can't work through the flesh if the flesh has died with Christ. But your flesh is active, and therefore, you're a pawn of the Devil.

Since you accuse God of sin, but can't actually show it, realize you are like the Devil who is called the great false accuser. His character is your character. God never made an error with Noah's Arc. It was the perfect act. Noah was a righteous man whom God provided the Arc in a local flood to save a remnant. God destroys and punishes not for praise, but because He is righteous, and He can't have sin pervade the land which would interfere with His redemptive plan. While you want hedonism to continue, God is good and can't allow it, so He saves a remnant. It saddens God's heart than even after saving Noah sin reasserted itself, so God had to continue to provide rectifying measures. God here is not regretting the Arc. On the contrary, He is saddened that sin so soon was back in full view. While you defend evil and try to preserve it, God destroys it. You accuse God of murder, but God is actually eradicating it especially when it is irredeemable. If you had your way there would still be child sacrifices thrown into the fiery mouth of Molech which you would try to make psychologically acceptable. Whereas God uses Israel to destroy those nations. God can do whatever He wants, but always does the right thing. He always does what is unrighteous, holy and true. Now that's a God you can trust in.

Atheism necessitates being selfish and cruel, because it is selfish and cruel to preach no God and consequently, no consequences. An atheist could never be like a Christian, because an atheist teaches that no matter what he does it doesn't matter; he will just cease to exist, so no real consequence. Whereas in Christianity the consequence is real, both Heaven and Hell, as well as rewards for believers over other believers during the millennial kingdom (firstfruits and later harvest). After the millennium though rewards are done away for believers; in other words, our precise belonging is established in the New City.

I am not like you. I am not a hater. I love my enemy, but I do hate sin. I would not want a single person to perish, but know that free will is true, and if you refuse God's saving solution, you're a psychopath. I am passionate about Christ, because He is proven to be true so to reject Christ is psychopathic. You have never been able to overturn that proof. Truly a psychopathic and delusional stance to remain unregenerate.


You quote Romans, but perhaps you will respond better to the words of Jesus, whom you are disobeying with your hideous comments: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust." - Matthew 5:43-45 (ESV). It is painful listening to people live by a Holy book which they obviously have not read. If Jesus speaks truth, then your words are in disagreement with truth. You are not to condemn people, you are to forgive and try to show them the way, and pray for them. Telling them they are damned and selfish is never going to make anyone admire you nor your beliefs. You make Christianity look unsavoury and sour, like nothing more than scriptural barbarism. Your Lord would hardly be impressed.
I have read the Bible many times. My words are in agreement with Matt. 5. I pray for you. I love my enemy. Why do I love? Because there is still opportunity for you to give your life to Christ so I pray for you. As God loves you so do I. Think how hideous your comments are in your hostility towards God when He says to love your enemy and you call this hideous. You provide no backing for your accusation. Again, you act like Satan the great false accuser. God provides grace and mercy to everyone. Consider this common grace on the unjust and the evil too. I don't condemn you, you condemn yourself. I am just repeating what John chapter 3 says that you are going to Hell because you are too selfish to give your life to Christ. You're a bad guy! I show you the way of redemption and the way of remaining unregenerate. God affords you the choice and I impart that truth. Everyone is damned unless God provides the solution. This is part of the gospel of message. You simply don't understand the consequence of sin is death. I do not intend to win acclaim by telling you this, just telling you because it is the truth. Sin leads to death and the second death which is Hell. You are going to Hell because you refuse to give your life to Christ. Think how barbaric you are and sour a taste you leave people with, for Jesus gave His life and you are like one of those who put Him to death instead of receiving His mercy and love.


All knowledge we have points to life being finite and natural. Even if there is a God, He as not provided us with any good proof to the contrary. Would any God truly appreciate people wanting eternal life, as though they were unable to appreciate the lengthy - though finite - one they had been given? I do not wish to have eternal life; I wish to have what is given. Your greed for eternity and excitement at the suffering of those who disagree with you is testimony to self-centredness in its purest form. Indifference to human suffering and dissatisfaction with life as we have come to know it. Perhaps I can humble you by reminding you... Rarely does one ever deserve better, if he is unwilling to settle for less. Do good deeds and care for other beings, and if there is a God, you will be rewarded. Hatred and indifference will only grant you pass into the place you fear the most, and you know where that is.
We know we will all be resurrected, because you can't find a naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles seeing and speaking and touching Jesus after He died on the cross. As He was resurrected He assured we all would be. People do appreciate this life, for they have given their lives to Christ...there is no greater expression of life. The only true fulfillment in this life is in Christ for only He lived the perfect life. Let us be Christlike. What is given to you is you are made in God's image which can never cease to exist. How you respond to Jesus in this life determines where you spend the next. You may not wish to exist forever; nonetheless, you will. You will not receive eternal life, because you are going to Hell. Understand "eternal life" in the Bible is not referring to always existing as though indistinguishable from the unsaved who always exist, but indicates the life of the saved, the life of God's sons and daughters who get to be eternally with God and the Lamb at the center of the New City. John 17.3 says "eternal life" is a new ability to have a relationship with God the Father through Christ Jesus by the Holy Spirit.

Nobody knows all the things God has planned for those who love Him. I do love a good mystery. Greed would be a characteristic of the unregenerate who want to keep their sinful lives and separated from God. Selfless life is eternal life with God always doing His will even when our feelings might contend. I have no excitement for your eternal torment in Hell as your excitement to be expunged from existence. I shed a tear for you. Self-centeredness is so psychotic you hate God so much you would rather cease to exist than be in His loving arms...if you can't be exalted then you would rather cease to exist. You have a sick mind! How can you not inch by inch be led into indifference as an atheist because in the end your end is the same as everyones' good or bad. Your good deeds you do still can never save you. Distinguish good deeds done in Christ once saved vs. deeds done to exalt yourself apart from Christ. The latter is doomed.


It is always saddening to see people in an age of science and reason speaking like people from 5, 000 years ago. You really ought to rethink your worldview, as you sound more like you are preaching fundamentalist Islam, than Christianity (read the Qur'an and look at how similar your words are to those of Muhammad). I have no reason to pledge my life to Christ, as I have no evidence he existed. Claims in an ancient book are not good enough, and any intelligent Creator would know this. You may say Christ died for my sins, but I do not believe in vicarious redemption. My sins are my own and I would never let anyone else suffer for them, and just say 'thanks' for it. I will live and die by my own actions, and Jesus (if he exists) is not entitled to my sins; they are my own and I will redeem myself in whatever way I see fit. If you feel at ease with thinking someone else was killed for you, then by all means... ...
The height of arrogance is thinking you have some special privilege over people from 5000 years ago. They were made in God's image just like you. Salvation for them is the same for you: a looking to the coming Messiah is the Christ you look back upon that eternal cross. As Abel gave a proper offering unto salvation, Cain such as yourself gave an offering of his own works.

Islam is much like your atheism, because they both have in common no consideration for evidence. You can't come along six centuries later and claim Jesus never died on the cross with no evidence whatsoever. Nothing is more documented in antiquity than is the cross of Christ from both Christian and non-Christian sources. Similarly, you have no evidence for your atheism. You present no challenge to the proof for God and Jesus being God and salvation on in Him. Jesus is the most documented person in antiquity. Since you shut your mind down, don't think that gets you off. You condemn yourself because God placed His Son as the most documented person on human record in antiquity. The ancient texts of the 66 books of the Bible are good enough. It gives the proof, the multiple eyewitness testimony of the Apostles, the religio-historical perspective of God's plan, and perfect agreement among 40 authors over 1500 years. An Intelligent Creator can provide no greater proof than this. You can think of no greater proof showing how perfect His proof is. The ransom Jesus paid is not a vicarious act in our imagination of our soul's mind, will and emotion. But it is a literal quickening of your intuitive spirit with awareness of God and new life for the Holy Spirit to indwell. You can't just imagine it to be so to let it be so. It must be a genuine acceptance and realization which can only occur through God's grace. God says, consequently, that if you search Him out with all your heart and soul, surely you will find Him, for this redemption to ensue. So the reason you remain dead in your sins is because you are too selfish to search God out with all your heart and soul sincerely. You love your sin nature too much; self is at the center of all you do.

God would never want someone to pay for your sins either except He Himself. That's a form of Arianism. Only He Himself is qualified to pay the ransom. Anything less than God redeeming is insufficient and deficient. Since you don't want God's solution--knowing man can't solve his own sin problem--you nonetheless prefer to remain in your sin nature bound for Hell. God gives you this free choice. Just know that no person can satisfy God's heart but God's own heart. His own way is pay what only He can truly reconcile. You can't redeem yourself. Your sins are a product of your sin nature and free will to remain in them. God owns everything. Those who remain in their sin go to Hell. Think how you exalt yourself when you claim Jesus is not entitled to your sins as though that is something to be desired. How twisted! Your sins are a bad thing. Jesus takes all your sins upon Himself to redeem you if you are willing to accept His sacrifice. The penalty must be paid which is Hell. You admit you want Hell. Just know that if you allow Jesus to take all your sins upon Himself, He will redeem you back to Him and you can escape Hell. This is my prayer for you that you don't have to remain as you are. The choice is verily before you now.


As for you offer of eternity... Like I said, I do not desire it. I am content with what I have, and am humbled in knowing it is not eternal. If you cannot see the beauty in what is finite, then what chance have you of treasuring each day in infinity? This finite life is not something I can afford to pledge to the words in a book full of contradictions and (what I believe are) evil creeds. You are free to do so, and as long as you treat others well and fairly (unlike what your words here suggest you do), then I have no problem with you believing any of these things. Just don't go around criticising people you don't understand, or telling people they will burn for not being credulous. You can pray for me if you wish, but in return I can only offer you my pity; my thoughts at best.
A Christian would never be content with what you have, because you have the evil spirit in your innerman and you are bound for perdition with Satan and his minions, rapists, murderers, thieves, etc. There is no humility in delusionally thinking a person in God's image will cease to exist. God's image cannot be encroached on like that. You know that you will be resurrected as Jesus was, and you know this is true, because you can't find a naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles in various group settings. Isn't that wonderful? How it always comes back to Christ. When I was born-again I realized all things sum in Christ. How can someone truly appreciate the finite if they can't appreciate the infinitely great God? While a Christian can, therefore, appreciate the finite through the infinite, the same cannot be said of someone who sees everything as finite and destined for the dredges. So Christians truly appreciate the finite whereas atheists only give accolades. Assuming contradictions in the Bible does not make it so. Whereas we have proven the contradictions of your beliefs. Think what God shows is righteous you consider evil. So the moral standard is different. God destroys evil through these creeds that you profess as evil, thus, you protect evil. That will never do.

You have been treated well and fairly by these words. I pray you do the same. It is because Christians love that we go around sharing the gospel of salvation that includes mentioning Hell as the consequence of rejecting salvation. Otherwise Jesus' death was in vain. Don't construe this as criticizing but God's love. Do you see how you are not treating others fairly, for what Christian do you think gives the gospel out of credulity? Surely none of us think that. We are evidentialists. We give our testimony out of the proof of Christ. How are you not treating others fairly and well? You keep your hostility in place without adhering to evidence. You can find no naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles so as to shut your mind down. Caring people don't act this way. They don't go contrary to evidence. You may exalt yourself in your pitying others; I don't pity you. I do realize you are a sinner awash in his sin and prefers his selfish self over God's selfless life. May you treat others as you would like to be treated and stop criticizing Christians and pitying us.

Keep this thought in mind that since you can't cease to exist, and you can't be with God's elect because you reject God's love where else can you go but Hell? Your intolerance is showing because you demand Christians not give the gospel of salvation. Whereas Christians allow you to speak. In future days, your hatred towards Christians will accelerate and our martyrdom at your hand will follow as you continue to try to enforce not allowing the gospel to be mentioned. You're a bad guy!

I think that gives a clear indication of one's future actions are unholy.

[Parture]

I don't believe LoLord you are going to address the proof for God and proof for Jesus being God but try to skirt around it as you have done in so many words already, so this is a good stopping point. We would just be repeating ourselves beyond this. God's grace has been abundant here for you. My prayer is in months or years from now from time to time you come back and digest these truths.

[Churchwork]

I have removed LoLord because of what he stands for...his email address is chickchoke@.... which is offensive to say the least.

As per the morality of LoLord we can see his morality is decrepit not caring for either the finite or infinite. Down right psychopathic!

[Parture]

I forgot to address one final point of yours. You noted that a man is not defined by his works alone, and this is a true statement according to the Bible; though you ought to recall Jesus praising the 'good Samaritan', who could not have been Christian because he did not know of the religion. However, a huge hole is that it must be better to search for answers than to declare them in ignorance; which is what you do. Any scripture can claim that our faith is more important than knowledge, and lead us into behaviours which are incredibly foolish (e.g., paying money to ascend through the levels of freedom, as is the case in Scientology). Your claim that people would not die for untruth is particularly dubious. By this logic, Islamic extremists must be convinced by truth because they are pledging their lives to Allah and dying for his cause.
All your misunderstanding stems from the flesh trying to understand that of the spirit. The Bible is a cohesive whole. At least try to understand that cohesive whole as it is presented rather than constantly misreading passage after passage. Really how many times do you need to be corrected? That's the least you could do if you still want to reject it. Don't throw into the pot as "the religion"; rather, the good Samaritan is showing a parable. What is the teaching? It is a teaching on mercy as God is merciful so the one who is a good Samaritan would surely accept the mercy of God's only begotten Son--most merciful act ever known to mankind!

Think about that. Everyone is subject to the opportunity for salvation from Adam to today. It is one in the same religion: the way to God. Common grace is sufficient for everyone; God goes even further with the special grace of the gospel. For someone who accepts the God of the mountains and stars, rejecting the idols worshiped by others around him, inextricably leads to Jesus Christ. Christians were not called Christians until Antioch. This doesn't mean a person is not saved before then. Enoch was raptured alive. David was a man after God's own heart. You don't abide in your own principle for you declare in ignorance atheism while not addressing the proof of the evidence given for God and Jesus being God. Knowledge of the gospel and proof of Jesus being God leads to faith, for faith is evidential, not blind as your faith in atheism. Think about that. What level of evil society have you paid into through your affiliations with atheism? Atheism is quite like scientology because they both believe in infinite regress of nature as their aliens still have a cause from something else in nature. Others are deists claiming the aliens created us, but they are not the ultimate Creator. Christians consider this evil for God to allow creation of mankind not in His image. Totally different morality.

It's a fact people don't willingly die for what they know is a lie. That's why you can't find any cases otherwise. Islamic extremists don't willingly die for what they know is a lie, for they truly believe in what they are doing. Your dubious attempt to not draw this distinction is dishonest on your part. The argument is not that they are convinced by what they believe, for clearly they do, but what then is the naturalistic explanation to account for their conviction? There may be several but none substantial like the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles for Islam is not founded a group eyewitness attestation, but other factors such as the most predominant anti-Caucasian faith or not wanting to give their lives to Christ and preferring to follow a murderous tyrant Mohammad when he did not get his way. What foolishness is the 40 million killed by the atheist Stalin, the 30 million by Hitler, and the 60 million by atheist Mao! Blind faith in atheism leads to blind murder!


When we look around us, there is no 'evidence' that a Deity exists because most such things can be explained by science appealing to natural processes. Even life is slowly becoming understandable in scientific terms, and scientists have been able to create amino-acids / self-replicators in laboratory settings, which is a huge step towards unravelling the mystery of biogenesis. You can close your eyes, your heart, and your mind to these developments, but that is your prerogative; no one can force you to rise from credulity. While one's pursuit of knowledge may not be enough to redeem him, it is better than making ignorant claims. The former is much more honest, though Psalms 14:1 would have it that any nonbeliever doing anything is futile. Given this, I hope you do not use too many modern medicines, as there are a great many atheists in the scientific community, trying to discover cures for diseases that God so lovingly provided us with. The problem with asserting that our works and investigations are inferior to faith, as is suggested in Ephesians 2:8-10 (ESV) is that the claim that we ourselves are evidence of God's glory, and that we need only have faith, are claims made my numerous scriptures (e.g., the Qur'an repeatedly makes this dubious claim). Your faith is little more justified than any other, and yet you are so confident that you will dismiss them as fools (an amusing position).
Natural processes can't explain infinite regress, because if it were true, you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so. So eternity past is a man made concept. God uses this natural world so many things are a natural like the natural man with flesh and blood. But nature can't explain the resurrection of Jesus or how miraculous healings occur or near death experiences that identify things they could not have known. Naturalism fails to address how a person can come to believe in Christ whence before they thought such a thing could never be possible. What has changed? God's grace has touched another heart.

Science glorifies God as the more we learn about science, the more we see God's working. Scientists can build an apparatus of already existing material, but they have no idea how to get that material to come into being for life. Abiogenesis fails at every level. Non-life never comes with a conscience, self-consciousness, God-consciousness, world-consciousness with a free will, mind, emotion, intuition and ability to commune; not even that of sight, touch, hearing, smelling, taste. There is no mystery of abiogenesis: it's impossible! You can close your mind to the fact the more we learn of these materials the further away abiogenesis is. Think how ignorant you are that you think the pursuit of knowledge is the purview of atheists only. The only thing atheists have a lock on when it comes to science is abusive of it and false theories abound, e.g. stupid something from nothing theory.

"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good" (Ps. 14.1). You are the fool going to hell.

Works and faith go hand in hand, but new birth cannot be achieved by works for no amount of work can satisfy God. Remember God is infinitely great so only His work is the solution through His Son. James' epistle is known for discussing the matter of works and faith. It's funny how you keep missing the point about how new birth cannot be achieved by works. The point is well expressed here so why misuse this passage?

"God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God" (Eph. 2.8).

Verse 10 reads, "For we are God’s masterpiece. He has created us anew in Christ Jesus, so we can do the good things he planned for us long ago."

The good things He has planned for those He chose before the foundations of the world flow from His good tidings. Whereas yours flow from boasting in self. Which is better? That which stems from God or from selfish self centered on self and not centered on Christ? In fact, you can never truly do good, because self is already always at your center. You are so blinded by self you can't see how selfish you really are.

The Bible never says works are of no regard. True good works flow from faith. Your interpretation of things is twisted; even what you are arguing against is not what the Bible teaches, so you are building sand piles of nonsense. Faith and works are not in competition but complimentary. Faith is evidenced so should not good works follow in line with that faith?

You are totally mistaken about the Quran. They teach salvation by works not by faith alone. They work hard for their faith never knowing they are saved or not, not knowing the blessings of God that all one need do is believe to be saved in Christ. Think how hard a life that is in Islam to work and work like the Roman Church that great harlot to try to earn salvation. This is basically the common theme of all religions and atheism to work for it. Only in Christianity can you not work for initial salvation; for as the blessing of being saved provides, good works flow from that new life unto rewards; that is, not to be saved, but as related to the millennial kingdom when Jesus returns. it is the reward of reigning over the nations (Rev. 2.26,27).

While we can find no evidence for atheism or other religions, we can be supremely confident in God's proof through nature and Jesus being God because still to this day nobody can find a naturalistic explanation for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles. This assures us that atheists are going to Hell as redemption is only achievable by what Jesus did on the cross and accepting it.

Eventually you will bow down to Christ, and He will reign over you with a rod of iron if you are still left living when Jesus returns.