The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom

[Beagle1]

And once again I have explained why in previous posts.

You’re correct in your above response and you may have stated why in a previous post. But honestly it is starting to look like a “it’s done because I said it’s done.” reply. If the same question gets asked to you multiple times maybe it’s because your response is not clear or it is found to be contradictory. I can tell you that if you are here to change minds then it is not going to work.

So if you are not going to change anyone’s mind, and you are not searching yourself, then I ask with all sincerity what is your point?
[/QUOTE]

It sounds like you’re taking my participation as if I must be here to “change minds.” But I’ve been clear my aim is to question the claims being made, and to discuss the reasons behind them. That’s what happens in a forum, people present ideas and opinions and others examine and respond to them.

Your faith itself isn’t under my control and I’m not asking you to surrender it. What I’m doing is engaging with the reasons you and others give for it. If those reasons are strong, they should stand up to scrutiny. If they’re not, it’s fair to point that out. That’s no different from how any other thread here works but when the topic is religion, suddenly the same process is treated as suspect.

The question of whether God exists is maybe the most important question of anyone’s lifetime. If it’s true, it shapes everything. If it’s not, that matters just as much. To me that’s why it requires examination and not insulation.

So my point is simple: discussion. If believers want to post their views, skeptics are free to examine them.

Now I await the next time I am asked the same question about my motives.

 

[go_deep]

“But to you who hear I say, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,
bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.
To the person who strikes you on one cheek, offer the other one as well, and from the person who takes your cloak, do not withhold even your tunic.
Give to everyone who asks of you, and from the one who takes what is yours do not demand it back.
Do to others as you would have them do to you.
For if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them.
And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do the same.
If you lend money to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit [is] that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, and get back the same amount.
But rather, love your enemies and do good to them, and lend expecting nothing back; then your reward will be great and you will be children of the Most High, for he himself is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.
Be merciful, just as also your Father is merciful.
Luke. 6:27-36

 

[go_deep]

Stop judging and you will not be judged. Stop condemning and you will not be condemned. Forgive and you will be forgiven.
Luke 6:37

 

[Beagle1]

Are you arguing with me over the fact that I acknowledge my own bias? lol I do not reject said evidence automatically I actually watch and or listen to discussions and come to my own conclusion, I am allowed to do that.
You think God contradicts Himself? Please show me where.

You’re free to acknowledge your bias but what you said earlier was that no new evidence would ever change your mind. That’s not just bias, that’s closing the door before you even see what might come in. If nothing could count against your position, then what you call “weighing evidence” is really just accepting what reinforces what you already believe.

As for contradictions, they’re well-documented by scholars and skeptics alike. You and anyone else can look them up with a quick search. I don’t see much point in pasting long lists here, especially since you’ve already said no amount of evidence would matter.

And as I’ve noted, Muslims say the same about the Quran, Mormons about the Book of Mormon, and others about their scriptures. Each insists their text is immune from contradiction, so the logic works just as well for them as for you. It doesn’t prove the faith is true, it just shows it’s closed off from examination.

But let me ask you this: if truth really is from God, why would it need to be shielded from evidence? If it’s true, scrutiny should only confirm it. When someone refuses even the possibility of counter evidence, that suggests the belief isn’t standing on strength but on insulation.

 

[Shortschaf]

But let me ask you this: if truth really is from God, why would it need to be shielded from evidence? If it’s true, scrutiny should only confirm it. When someone refuses even the possibility of counter evidence, that suggests the belief isn’t standing on strength but on insulation.

What proof do you think should be sufficient for a Christian to stop believing in God

 

[socoalt]

You’re correct in your above response and you may have stated why in a previous post. But honestly it is starting to look like a “it’s done because I said it’s done.” reply. If the same question gets asked to you multiple times maybe it’s because your response is not clear or it is found to be contradictory. I can tell you that if you are here to change minds then it is not going to work.

So if you are not going to change anyone’s mind, and you are not searching yourself, then I ask with all sincerity what is your point?

It sounds like you’re taking my participation as if I must be here to “change minds.” But I’ve been clear my aim is to question the claims being made, and to discuss the reasons behind them. That’s what happens in a forum, people present ideas and opinions and others examine and respond to them.

Your faith itself isn’t under my control and I’m not asking you to surrender it. What I’m doing is engaging with the reasons you and others give for it. If those reasons are strong, they should stand up to scrutiny. If they’re not, it’s fair to point that out. That’s no different from how any other thread here works but when the topic is religion, suddenly the same process is treated as suspect.

The question of whether God exists is maybe the most important question of anyone’s lifetime. If it’s true, it shapes everything. If it’s not, that matters just as much. To me that’s why it requires examination and not insulation.

So my point is simple: discussion. If believers want to post their views, skeptics are free to examine them.

Now I await the next time I am asked the same question about my motives.
[/QUOTE]

We are typing on the internet so we don’t have the luxury of social cues that go with an in person conversation. I am not insulted, but rather enjoy the discussion that you are offering. I asked my question to clarify to myself what was motivating you to engage here. As a skeptic are you genuinely curious about faith or are you looking try to debunk scripture? Your motives have a lot to do with the thread since this has gone a very different direction than what I believe the op was intending when he started it. If discussion is really your point that is great and I welcome it.


I disagree with your statement that the question if God exists is the most important question of people’s lifetime.
I agree that if he does then it matters more than anything else in the our lives. But I disagree in that if believers are wrong and he doesn’t then in the end when we die if there is nothing, then it doesn’t matter at all.

 

[JackButler]

Yes, swine is a perfect description of you in this context.

There it is, the Christian way…

 

[Valsport]

There it is, the Christian way…

Hey brother.
It's gonna be good.

 

[Beagle1]

What proof do you think should be sufficient for a Christian to stop believing in God

From what Christians here have said, it seems there really isn’t any proof that would make them stop believing. The core assumption is that faith endures even against counter-evidence. That’s not the same as weighing evidence, that’s making the belief unfalsifiable. When someone says “nothing could change my mind,” they’ve already closed their mind before any argument or discovery is made.

But if we take the question seriously, what could count as disproof? Examples might include clear, unresolvable contradictions between the Bible and reality: archaeology proving beyond doubt that central figures like Moses or David never existed, or decisive evidence that the resurrection never happened. Either one would strike at the foundation of Christianity. But if we’re honest, history shows believers almost always find ways to explain such things away, even in the face of definitive proof.

It’s also worth mentioning that there are countless stories of fervent believers who did lose their faith, and they’ve explained in detail what convinced them. That shows it can happen. I would point you to them if you are interested in the reasons that persuade a Christian to stop believing

Now compare that to what it would take for a nonbeliever to accept God’s existence. The bar isn’t impossibly high. A present day clear, verifiable event that can’t be explained by natural causes would do it. Evidence that was truly definitive would matter to skeptics. Ironically, the group most likely to struggle with that kind of proof would be some believers, especially if it contradicted aspects of their own theology or, worse, validated a rival religion’s scriptures instead.

 

[JGRaider]

There it is, the Christian way…

"swine" in scripture is referring to those who have zero interest in learning the truth about God no matter what. That is the perfect description of several here, but that obviously flies right over your head.

 

[Beagle1]

It sounds like you’re taking my participation as if I must be here to “change minds.” But I’ve been clear my aim is to question the claims being made, and to discuss the reasons behind them. That’s what happens in a forum, people present ideas and opinions and others examine and respond to them.

Your faith itself isn’t under my control and I’m not asking you to surrender it. What I’m doing is engaging with the reasons you and others give for it. If those reasons are strong, they should stand up to scrutiny. If they’re not, it’s fair to point that out. That’s no different from how any other thread here works but when the topic is religion, suddenly the same process is treated as suspect.

The question of whether God exists is maybe the most important question of anyone’s lifetime. If it’s true, it shapes everything. If it’s not, that matters just as much. To me that’s why it requires examination and not insulation.

So my point is simple: discussion. If believers want to post their views, skeptics are free to examine them.

Now I await the next time I am asked the same question about my motives.

We are typing on the internet so we don’t have the luxury of social cues that go with an in person conversation. I am not insulted, but rather enjoy the discussion that you are offering. I asked my question to clarify to myself what was motivating you to engage here. As a skeptic are you genuinely curious about faith or are you looking try to debunk scripture? Your motives have a lot to do with the thread since this has gone a very different direction than what I believe the op was intending when he started it. If discussion is really your point that is great and I welcome it.


I disagree with your statement that the question if God exists is the most important question of people’s lifetime.
I agree that if he does then it matters more than anything else in the our lives. But I disagree in that if believers are wrong and he doesn’t then in the end when we die if there is nothing, then it doesn’t matter at all.
[/QUOTE]

Just to be clear, I’m not saying your faith or the good life you’ve lived because of it means nothing. What I’m saying is that the truth of God’s existence is hugely important either way. If God exists, it changes everything about reality, morality and what comes after death. If he doesn’t, that still matters because billions of people have built their lives and societies around something untrue.

So my point wasn’t that a faithful life is wasted, it’s that the yes or no of God’s existence has world-shaping consequences.

 

[go_deep]

Since screen names don't depict men verse men.

Some of you guys and gals need to dial it back. The person you interacting with is not your close friend who your sitting across the table with and know that you might be able to say some challenging things to. Understand your audience and the platform your on. Alienating a stranger from the faith may very much so hurt you more in the end then them.

I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another.
This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
John 13:34-35

People at times need to hear the hard truth, but they need to hear it from the right person, in the right setting.

 

[JGRaider]

Since screen names don't depict men verse men.

Some of you guys and gals need to dial it back. The person you interacting with is not your close friend who your sitting across the table with and know that you might be able to say some challenging things to. Understand your audience and the platform your on. Alienating a stranger from the faith may very much so hurt you more in the end then them.

I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another.
This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
John 13:34-35

People at times need to hear the hard truth, but they need to hear it from the right person, in the right setting.

I get it, but I have a very hard time apologizing for stating the Truth, especially when it has eternal consequences.

 

[Beagle1]

"swine" in scripture is referring to those who have zero interest in learning the truth about God no matter what. That is the perfect description of several here, but that obviously flies right over your head.

Ah yes, I see you’re only taking the biblical “high road.” If “swine” means people with no interest in truth, then nonbelievers don’t fit your own definition. We’re here precisely because we’re interested in examining truth claims about God, that’s why we ask questions and weigh the answers. Disagreement isn’t the same as having “zero interest.”

It’s also telling how convenient it is to dismiss critics by calling them swine. That way you don’t have to engage with their arguments at all. But if your view is really correct, it should be able to stand on its own merit without needing name calling as a shield.

Of course, pointing that out will probably “fly right over your head,” since it’s easier to label people than actually deal with what they’re saying.

 

[go_deep]

I get it, but I have a very hard time apologizing for stating the Truth, especially when it has eternal consequences.

I don't know if you have kids or not, so if you don't, maybe this enology doesn't work for you, but I'll try it.

If you tell your kids to clean up their room and they don't, how would you treat a 4 year old kid verse a 16 year old kid? Differently is the answer. And this is a way of communication that needs to be handled differently due to the one way communication, hidden behind screen names and not faces.

I completely agree, I wish everyone didn't have to learn the hard way like I did to get to where I am in my faith, so badly wish everyone understood the peace that my faith gives me, along with so many other fulfilling things, I want others to know it and have it so bad. But if I do things that make them run from it, rather than run towards it, I myself have failed in glorying God.

Peace brother!

 

[Beagle1]

I get it, but I have a very hard time apologizing for stating the Truth, especially when it has eternal consequences.

You don’t need to apologize for what you believe.

Funny how your “Truth” always seems to need an insult to prop it up.

 

[go_deep]

Today's gospel reading. Coincidence? I think not.

Jesus said to his disciples:
"I have come to set the earth on fire,
and how I wish it were already blazing!
There is a baptism with which I must be baptized,
and how great is my anguish until it is accomplished!
Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth?
No, I tell you, but rather division.
From now on a household of five will be divided,
three against two and two against three;
a father will be divided against his son
and a son against his father,
a mother against her daughter
and a daughter against her mother,
a mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law."
Luke 12:49-53