Sarkus said:
There may be - but the Wright brothers weren't laughed at because they used Mathematics. The tool is just that - a tool. People laugh at the purpose to which the tool is put - in the case of the Wright brothers - flight.
Mathematics is a tool of pure logic.
It can not be called into question. Only its application can be.
Now we could devise something that helps us more than Maths - but then we've always created better tools. There's no argument there.
But bear in mind, that 1 + 1 = 2 no matter what "language" you put it in. You could call 2 10 in binary - but it still means the same thing.
That is what I'm talking about. We think in binary. How do we know there is not a method in our brain that we can't unlock to enable us to calculate three or four dimensionally?
Sarkus said:
For every person who has supposedly been helped by "god" there has been a person seemingly let down by him.
Have you ever seen Bruce Almighty? What would happen if God answered all our prayers right away? What would happen if we always got what we asked for? We would be spoiled and bored because life would be a bowl of cherries day-in and day-out. Not a pretty picture.
But anyway, the faith is hard to keep because we are self-centered by instinct, and it is not God who let them down, but they who have decided to give up on waiting for his blessing. Those that keep the faith are those that are blessed, they are those that kick their bad habits in one day. If you asked your dad for $10,000 and he didn't reply because it he didn't have it yet, and you stopped asking and didn't talk to him anymore just because he didn't respond in your timing. Would he want to give you $10,000 anymore?
I wouldn't want a God who worked on MY schedule. That would take away his divination and make him no better than me.
Sarkus said:
Since when is evidence of the existence of a place to be used to strengthen the case for "miracles". And Mt. Sinai is not a miracle - it is a place. What happened there might be deemed a miracle - but Mt. Sinai is just a place.
I could write a novel based in the UK and include many "miracles" - but just because the places may exist doesn't in any way add credence to the "miracles" I might describe.
Good point. But it helps to have a tangible thumbprint of the event. A picture is worth a thousand words, and God on the mountain is not the only miracle in the story of the Exodus from Egypt. Moses performed many more miracles that have the thumbprint of the event. So, if the event happened, and we have only one explaination, dare we go against ancient text that give an account of the event?
The problem with your novel is that everyone knows the history of the UK and can confirm or deny your miracles as fact or fiction.
Sarkus said:
Okay, let me simplify it for you: you are saying you are a believer because someone claimed to be the Son of God? And thus if they WERE truly the Son of God, then not only does God exist, but this person is their Son.
This is begging the question.
No offence, but it also makes you gullible.
What of all the other people since then who have claimed to be the Son of God? Why not believe them? After all, if THEY are correct, then you've been following the wrong one.
HEHE. That would suck.
No, you misunderstand me. The Bible itself I have trouble accepting wholly that it was written by God's inspiration, because it was written by human hands. My faith in God is the culmination of experience, the Bible, testimonies, and the lack of proof of any other theory being the truth.
The good news is for me is that there is enough prophecy, physical evidence, and the like to persuade me to follow Christ over all other gods and Christ wanna-bes. The Bible warns of anyone who says they are the Christ before the second coming on the clouds. And the Bible was written by many authors, not just one Muhhamed, or one Buddah. So the odds of something being the truth increase with the number of testimonies to the same truth.
Sarkus said:
No offence again, but bollox.
I would quite happily give my life to save my friends, my family. I will always be there when they need me the most. How do you equate this supposed "Christian love" that is being given by an atheist?
Right, so Christians are therefore inhuman?
No. You are blinkered.
The Bible warns me not to throw wisdom to wolves, because they will trample it like pearls because it is useless to them. But here I am, doing such things, but not for your sake, but to challenge myself.
I believe that you would lay your life down for your family. Would you lay your life down for your hated enemy merely because he was the Son of a friend?
Sarkus said:
If Christianity was about pleasing one's friends, then it is bullox.
It is about loving the unlovable as well as your friend.
Irrelevant. You are giving one example as proof of "Christian love".
And what of Muslims who die to save others?
What of soldiers who give their life to save people in other countries, of different races?
Sacrifice is NOT specific to Christianity - it never has been and never will be.
True, but I use Sacrifice because it is the strongest show of love.
Soldiers who die for their country die for something great. Put the same soldier and ask him to die not for his country, but for his mortal enemy to be saved. Would you get the same response?
Don't be caught up on sacrifice, I use it as an example because Christianity is about sacrifice of yourself 24/7.
Sarkus said:
I was picking up on a comment you made: "You have yet to experience the love a true Christian" when you were replying to someone else. This, in my book, is an invalid assumption unless you happen to know the life story of the person you are replying to. That was all.
If that person had experienced the love a true Christian, that person would be a Christian. Salvation comes through the show of love and sacrifice on the behalf of God. Then, God will use that show and draw them near. That is the way it works, but I understand you don't know how it works because you never experienced it. It is the Christian formula of salvation, and anyone who knows of it is a Christian.
Sarkus said:
As for believing in God 80-90% but having faith in him - this is illogical.
If you have faith you believe. End of story.
You can't be undecided about believing in god and still have 100% faith.
You might well be undecided about the various facets of the god in which you do believe, but you still believe 100% in god.
Belief and Faith are two different words. You may not believe something that looks like an orange is going to taste like in orange (but you are not 100% sure), but you have 100% faith that it will taste like an orange when you bite it. You don't know until you bite. (die)