The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom

[JGRaider]

That seems like a reach. Does it actually say that? Or just you trying to justify calling people swine that have different religious views?

It's been posted several times on this thread already.....

Matthew 7:6
King James Bible
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

 

[JGRaider]

Are you basically just saying that people have the choice to believe in god or not??? Again, what about people who were never exposed to these ideas? Do they go to hell???

Everyone has a chance to accept or reject. In reality, it is not that some people have not heard about God. Rather, the problem is that they have rejected what they have heard and what is readily seen in nature. Deuteronomy 4:29 proclaims, “But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul.” This verse teaches an important principle—everyone who truly seeks after God will find Him. If a person truly desires to know God, God will make Himself known.

 

[JackButler]

It's been posted several times on this thread already.....

Matthew 7:6
King James Bible
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

Glad I saw how bizarre and nonsensical this stuff was relatively early in life and got out of the cult.

 

[JackButler]

How is this applicable to say

Everyone has a chance to accept or reject. In reality, it is not that some people have not heard about God. Rather, the problem is that they have rejected what they have heard and what is readily seen in nature. Deuteronomy 4:29 proclaims, “But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul.” This verse teaches an important principle—everyone who truly seeks after God will find Him. If a person truly desires to know God, God will make Himself known.

How did this apply to say, the Chinese for about 5000 years? Or natives of this continent before Europeans brought Christianity here in the 1600’s. They literally would have never heard of Jesus their entire lives for hundreds of generations before then.

 

[Bugger]

It's been posted several times on this thread already.....

Matthew 7:6
King James Bible
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

So love your neighbor, do unto others as you would have them do to you, all are children of god… but also many of them are swine and not worth the effort…
That’s either a bad interpretation or admitting that god created failed experiments doomed to eternal torture.

 

[JGRaider]

So love your neighbor, do unto others as you would have them do to you, all are children of god… but also many of them are swine and not worth the effort…
That’s either a bad interpretation or admitting that god created failed experiments doomed to eternal torture.

You're interpretation couldn't be more off base. It would really benefit all you naysayers to go back and read this thread. The questions you're asking have all been addressed at least twice previously.

 

[Jason Snyder]

“Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a huge crowd of witnesses to the life of faith, let us strip off every weight that slows us down, especially the sin that so easily trips us up. And let us run with endurance the race God has set before us. We do this by keeping our eyes on Jesus, the champion who initiates and perfects our faith. Because of the joy awaiting him, he endured the cross, disregarding its shame. Now he is seated in the place of honor beside God’s throne.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭12‬:‭1‬-‭2‬ ‭NLT‬‬

 

[grainhog]

How do you hide a thread?

 

[Jason Snyder]

How do you hide a thread?

You can simply not open it. Even as dumb as I am, I can pull this off a couple hundred times a day with threads of no interest to me.

 

[taskswap]

You can simply not open it. Even as dumb as I am, I can pull this off a couple hundred times a day with threads of no interest to me.

There's no hate like Christian love. Wow, what a jerk.

Defend this. This'll be fun.

DOJ Opens Door To Stripping Citizenship Over Politics

Throughout the campaign, Republicans teased an idea: the next Trump government would...

talkingpointsmemo.com

 

[Jason Snyder]

There's no hate like Christian love. Wow, what a jerk.

Defend this. This'll be fun.

DOJ Opens Door To Stripping Citizenship Over Politics

Throughout the campaign, Republicans teased an idea: the next Trump government would...

talkingpointsmemo.com

How is it being a jerk? It was a simple response to the question. There are hundreds of threads a day that are of no interest to me whatsoever. I can be an adult and skip over them without entering each one and asking how to hide them, correct?

I have no desire to defend the article you posted and have no idea what relevance it has to the thread.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

How is this applicable to say

How did this apply to say, the Chinese for about 5000 years? Or natives of this continent before Europeans brought Christianity here in the 1600’s. They literally would have never heard of Jesus their entire lives for hundreds of generations before then.

Exactly my point.

 

[go_deep]

“This is the meaning of the parable. The seed is the word of God.
Those on the path are the ones who have heard, but the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts that they may not believe and be saved.
Those on rocky ground are the ones who, when they hear, receive the word with joy, but they have no root; they believe only for a time and fall away in time of trial.
As for the seed that fell among thorns, they are the ones who have heard, but as they go along, they are choked by the anxieties and riches and pleasures of life, and they fail to produce mature fruit.
But as for the seed that fell on rich soil, they are the ones who, when they have heard the word, embrace it with a generous and good heart, and bear fruit through perseverance.
Luke 8:11-15

 

[Beagle1]

Many have said this, yes. Some might truly be close minded about the chances of us being wrong. Mody probably because "proof of nonexistence" is still an unfathomable thing...
An alternative proof could do it though. If the mythical gods of Greece all showed themselves on earth to us complete with their magical powers, sure I think that would be proof enough. Is that an acceptable answer?

Even still, we could and should argue it is just a test of our faith. But it is a silly hypothetical, no?



Sure, if there is proof of outright nonexistence of these figures, I could abandon Christianity. But what kind of silly game is this?
They did exist. And "archealogical proof of nonexistence" is, in itself impossible.
You mistake us when we say "there is no proof that would be sufficient". We already HAVE the evidence. It is being honest about what is in front of us, not close minded.



Each and every one is explainable by a failure of mankind, so we are at an impass with this. None of those individuals who left the faith has seen "proof of nonexistance".

A lack of support by their fellow man and/or a lack of personal fortitude happened over and over and over with the Isrealites who were only ONE generation removed from the miracles of the Lord and Moses. We are thousands of years later, and it is no surprise that men turn to idols still.


Judas knew Christ personally, saw proof of miracles first hand, and still betrayed Christ. Probably countless others saw Christ first hand and still didn't believe. One thief died right next to Christ and mocked him.
So--you say the proof of Christianity is simple, but I am not as certain as you that any proof will ever be enough for some.


My closing is that you seem most critical of the "close minded" people, so I assure you there are many open minded Christians, and being open minded is what led us here. There is nothing intellectually superior about rejecting an idea just because there is no concrete evidence in your hand

Proof
You’ve actually highlighted the problem yourself. You say if the Greek gods appeared with their powers, that would be “proof enough.” But then you admit even that could just be called a “test of faith.” That shows the issue: any evidence, no matter how clear, can be reinterpreted to preserve belief. If Zeus shows up, it’s a deception. If God never shows up again, that’s a test. Both outcomes confirm faith. That makes Christianity unfalsifiable, set up so nothing can ever count against it. And when a belief system is built so every possible outcome proves it right, it’s on the same footing as every other religion that makes contradictory claims with the same logic.

Archaeology
You’re right that archaeology can’t “prove nonexistence.” But it can weigh biblical claims against history. When no evidence is found for supposed nation-shaping events, like hundreds of thousands of Israelites wandering the desert or a global flood, the silence itself is significant. If scripture says something happened in real history, but history shows no sign of it, the gap is filled by faith, not evidence. That’s why “we already have the evidence” is important, your evidence is testimony and conviction but skeptics point out that every competing religion offers the same thing. If faith and scripture are allowed to count as “evidence,” then every faith wins at once. That’s not open inquiry, it’s rule shifting so nothing can ever count against the claim.

Former Believers
When someone stays in the faith, it’s credited to God’s truth. When someone leaves, it’s blamed on their weakness or failure. That’s a rigged standard, it makes Christianity “true” no matter what the outcome is. But people who leave give other reasons: contradictions in scripture, unanswered prayers, moral concerns about what the Bible teaches. To dismiss that away as “lack of fortitude” avoids engaging their actual reasons. If every outcome always confirms Christianity, then the belief is insulated from challenge and that’s not how truth should work.

Judas and Open-Mindedness
Appealing to Judas or others who saw miracles but disbelieved doesn’t strengthen your case it weakens it. If even alleged eyewitnesses weren’t convinced, it shows the evidence wasn’t overwhelming and human testimony is unreliable. Christianity today depends entirely on that testimony, written down decades later by unknown authors. If people closest to the events doubted or rejected what they supposedly saw firsthand, how much weaker is the claim 2,000 years later? Calling that “hardness of heart” is an excuse. It really shows the evidence wasn’t strong enough to compel belief.

You say some Christians are open-minded. But open-mindedness means being willing to revise beliefs if evidence demands it. When many here say “nothing could change my mind,” that’s not open-mindedness. Skeptics can list clear examples of what would convince them: a present-day, verifiable miracle or consistent, unambiguous evidence that couldn’t be explained naturally. That difference is telling. It’s not that skeptics demand something silly, it’s that believers often refuse to define any standard by which their faith could be falsified. And if no standard exists, then the faith isn’t held because of evidence, but in spite of it

 

[Jason Snyder]

“What joy for those whose strength comes from the Lord, who have set their minds on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.”
‭‭Psalms‬ ‭84‬:‭5‬ ‭NLT‬‬

 

[dylanvb]

“For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence.”
‭‭I Corinthians‬ ‭1‬:‭26‬-‭29‬ ‭NKJV

 

[dylanvb]

It’s wild seeing a lot of non believers come in this Christian thread and try to de-rail it.

 

[socoalt]

Proof
You’ve actually highlighted the problem yourself. You say if the Greek gods appeared with their powers, that would be “proof enough.” But then you admit even that could just be called a “test of faith.” That shows the issue: any evidence, no matter how clear, can be reinterpreted to preserve belief. If Zeus shows up, it’s a deception. If God never shows up again, that’s a test. Both outcomes confirm faith. That makes Christianity unfalsifiable, set up so nothing can ever count against it. And when a belief system is built so every possible outcome proves it right, it’s on the same footing as every other religion that makes contradictory claims with the same logic.

Archaeology
You’re right that archaeology can’t “prove nonexistence.” But it can weigh biblical claims against history. When no evidence is found for supposed nation-shaping events, like hundreds of thousands of Israelites wandering the desert or a global flood, the silence itself is significant. If scripture says something happened in real history, but history shows no sign of it, the gap is filled by faith, not evidence. That’s why “we already have the evidence” is important, your evidence is testimony and conviction but skeptics point out that every competing religion offers the same thing. If faith and scripture are allowed to count as “evidence,” then every faith wins at once. That’s not open inquiry, it’s rule shifting so nothing can ever count against the claim.

Former Believers
When someone stays in the faith, it’s credited to God’s truth. When someone leaves, it’s blamed on their weakness or failure. That’s a rigged standard, it makes Christianity “true” no matter what the outcome is. But people who leave give other reasons: contradictions in scripture, unanswered prayers, moral concerns about what the Bible teaches. To dismiss that away as “lack of fortitude” avoids engaging their actual reasons. If every outcome always confirms Christianity, then the belief is insulated from challenge and that’s not how truth should work.

Judas and Open-Mindedness
Appealing to Judas or others who saw miracles but disbelieved doesn’t strengthen your case it weakens it. If even alleged eyewitnesses weren’t convinced, it shows the evidence wasn’t overwhelming and human testimony is unreliable. Christianity today depends entirely on that testimony, written down decades later by unknown authors. If people closest to the events doubted or rejected what they supposedly saw firsthand, how much weaker is the claim 2,000 years later? Calling that “hardness of heart” is an excuse. It really shows the evidence wasn’t strong enough to compel belief.

You say some Christians are open-minded. But open-mindedness means being willing to revise beliefs if evidence demands it. When many here say “nothing could change my mind,” that’s not open-mindedness. Skeptics can list clear examples of what would convince them: a present-day, verifiable miracle or consistent, unambiguous evidence that couldn’t be explained naturally. That difference is telling. It’s not that skeptics demand something silly, it’s that believers often refuse to define any standard by which their faith could be falsified. And if no standard exists, then the faith isn’t held because of evidence, but in spite of it

Maybe it can’t be falsified because it’s true. At some point there has to be some credit given that for 2000 years the Bible has not been proven to be a lie. Whether you believe in it or not it still has not been proven to be false.

At the end of the day we are talking about someone’s faith. The fact that there are some on here who lump everyone who identifies as a demographic as the same. If you are a Christian,Muslims, vegans, atheists, hunters, etc. then you are automatically lumped into the worst common denominator that serves a someone’s example. And that is not true for the whole of the demographic. When I as a Christian say that no evidence can change my mind about my faith just remember that I have half of a lifetime as a non believer. I have experience from two different lives to make my decision from. That is not being close minded. It is a well informed decision.

 

[socoalt]

It’s wild seeing a lot of non believers come in this Christian thread and try to de-rail it.

That is to be expected. This hasn’t happened on any other thread that I know of. Christianity really gets some peoples panties in a wad.

 

[Beagle1]

How is this applicable to say

How did this apply to say, the Chinese for about 5000 years? Or natives of this continent before Europeans brought Christianity here in the 1600’s. They literally would have never heard of Jesus their entire lives for hundreds of generations before then.

I see you appreciate that under Christian theology there is literally no excuse for not finding God because he can supposedly be seen by anyone through nature and conscience.The argument is people didn’t need missionaries to know God existed they could see God in the order and beauty of nature, or feel moral law written in their hearts. If they didn’t worship God, it was because they rejected him and were swine not because they lacked knowledge.

So tough luck for the billions of people throughout history who were never exposed to Christianity because they were born too early or in the wrong place.

It is also interesting that for thousands of years of civilizations exposed only to nature developed other forms of worship but not Christianity. There is a lesson there.

But also notice what this does to the Christian claim about free will that is cited time after time by believers here. On the one hand, Christians emphasize that belief must be freely chosen, not coerced. On the other, this view holds that everyone is already programmed with an awareness of God through conscience and creation, so disbelief is interpreted as willful rebellion rather than as ignorance. That narrows the range of free will. Instead of being able to weigh the evidence and decide, the argument assumes nonbelief is always a deliberate rejection of what people should “already know.” It’s the standard heads I win tails you lose version of Christian free will.

And that’s the irony: Christians want to say free will is real but their own theology rigs the outcome. Whatever choice a person makes, gets interpreted to confirm the system, belief is free acceptance, disbelief is willful rejection. No choice can ever count against the doctrine.