What if Jesus didn't die on the cross

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

1 Timothy is considered by many not to be genuine Pauline. I find it ironic that the proof you present for the veracity of 1 Corinthians 14:34 is a letter that is also considered a forgery. 1 Timothy 2:11-15 is a direct contradiction of Paul's teachings, who ever wrote this still had a grudge about Eve.

Quote

Many modernist critics delight in attacking the plain statements of Scripture and, for no good reason, deny that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles (1, 2 Tim., Titus). Ignoring the testimony of the letters themselves (1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1; Titus 1:1) and that of the early church (which is as strong for the Pastoral Epistles as for any of Paul’s epistles, except Rom. and 1 Cor.), these critics maintain that a devout follower of Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles in the second century. As proof, they offer 5 lines of supposed evidence: 1) The historical references in the Pastoral Epistles cannot be harmonized with the chronology of Paul’s life given in Acts; 2) The false teaching described in the Pastoral Epistles is the fully- developed Gnosticism of the second century; 3) The church organizational structure in the Pastoral Epistles is that of the second century, and is too well developed for Paul’s day; 4) The Pastoral Epistles do not contain the great themes of Paul’s theology; 5) The Greek vocabulary of the Pastoral Epistles contains many words not found in Paul’s other letters, nor in the rest of the NT.

While it is unnecessary to dignify such unwarranted attacks by unbelievers with an answer, occasionally such an answer does enlighten. Thus, in reply to the critics’ arguments, it can be pointed out that: 1) This contention of historical incompatibility is valid only if Paul was never released from his Roman imprisonment mentioned in Acts. But he was released, since Acts does not record Paul’s execution, and Paul himself expected to be released (Phil. 1:19,25,26; 2:24; Philem. 22). The historical events in the Pastoral Epistles do not fit into the chronology of Acts because they happened after the close of the Acts narrative which ends with Paul’s first imprisonment in Rome. 2) While there are similarities between the heresy of the Pastoral Epistles and second-century Gnosticism (see Introduction to Colossians: Background and Setting), there are also important differences. Unlike second-century Gnosticism, the false teachers of the Pastoral Epistles were still within the church (cf. 1:3–7) and their teaching was based on Judaistic legalism (1:7; Titus 1:10,14; 3:9). 3) The church organizational structure mentioned in the Pastoral Epistles is, in fact, consistent with that established by Paul (Acts 14:23; Phil. 1:1). 4) The Pastoral Epistles do mention the central themes of Paul’s theology, including the inspiration of Scripture (2 Tim. 3:15–17); election (2 Tim. 1:9; Titus 1:1,2); salvation (Titus 3:5–7); the deity of Christ (Titus 2:13); His mediatorial work (2:5), and substitutionary atonement (2:6). 5) The different subject matter in the Pastoral Epistles required a different vocabulary from that in Paul’s other epistles. Certainly a pastor today would use a different vocabulary in a personal letter to a fellow pastor than he would in a work of systematic theology.

The idea that a “pious forger” wrote the Pastoral Epistles faces several further difficulties: 1) The early church did not approve of such practices and surely would have exposed this as a ruse, if there had actually been one (cf. 2 Thess. 2:1,2; 3:17). 2) Why forge 3 letters that include similar material and no deviant doctrine? 3) If a counterfeit, why not invent an itinerary for Paul that would have harmonized with Acts? 4) Would a later, devoted follower of Paul have put the words of 1:13,15 into his master’s mouth? 5) Why would he include warnings against
deceivers (2 Tim. 3:13; Titus 1:10), if he himself were one?

The evidence seems clear that Paul wrote 1 Timothy and Titus shortly after his release from his first Roman imprisonment (ca. A.D. 62–64), and 2 Timothy from prison during his second Roman imprisonment (ca. A.D. 66–67), shortly before his death. First Timothy

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

This is bollocks. I have no belief in the Bible as anything other than a historical document but if you are going to debate at least do so with some sense of historical accuracy.

I completely agree with you on this one with regard to historicity Southern_Man.

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

Brother, the Truth needs no defense.
Look within yourself and you will know all.

"“The heart is more deceitful than all else
And is desperately sick; Who can understand it?"
(Jeremiah 17:9)

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

Hey Jaybird,
Do you realize that under Roman rule crucifiction wasn't necessarily a death sentence but was often used as a form of public humiliation as were the "stocks" in 17th century America?

According to the New Testament Pilate was inclined to let Jesus go free.
He put it up to a vote by the crowd.
Does that sound like the man was wanted for a capitol crime. Like the governor even ever considered a death sentence?
Or was public humiliation the sentence?

Oh.., one more thing.., Pilate had him crucified just before the beginning of Passover.
Pilate would have known that he would have to be removed from the cross before the passover.
He also would have known that it would usually take at least a week for a man to die from crucifiction.
Do you believe that Pilate intended a death penalty for Jesus ' little temper tantrum with the Jew money traders in the temple, or did Pilate just follow the crowds' lead and sentence him to a crucifiction for the purpose of public humiliation?

Could it be that Jesus' suffering is a parrallel to todays DUI offenders wearing the orange vests on Saturday( not to be confused with the fans of the University of Tennessee) picking up litter on the side of the road?

Peace,
Jim B

You post a whole lot of non-theological congecture based on nothing but your opinion speckled with hints of truth (very cultish).

[DiverMike 5]

Wow. A completely original thought that never occurred to me - Comparing cruxifiction to DUI orange vest trash pickers.
I never saw the connection - but now I do.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[jclalor 12]

Your understanding of early Christianity is about on a third grade level. You are dead wrong if you think only non-believers doubt that all the books in the NT are authentic and written by who they claim. When you choose to ignore the overwhelming evidence about the bible and still believe the bible is the inerrant word of God, it just shows your insecurity with your religion, Kind of like Muslim extremist.

So next time when go to church, be sure to leave your critical thinking skills at the door, grab your box of coloring crayons and have at it .

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

Your understanding of early Christianity is about on a third grade level. You are dead wrong if you think only non-believers doubt that all the books in the NT are authentic and written by who they claim. When you choose to ignore the overwhelming evidence about the bible and still believe the bible is the inerrant word of God, it just shows your insecurity with your religion, Kind of like Muslim extremist.

So next time when go to church, be sure to leave your critical thinking skills at the door, grab your box of coloring crayons and have at it .

I quoted Dr. John MacArthur. He is one of the best theologians of our time. I think he's above a third grade level on this topic. I happen to agree with him and the early Church Father testimonies. Your attack doesn't surprise anyone and it certainly doesn't line up with the overwhelming belief and testimomy of church history.

[jaybird18c 24]

God's High Calling for Women, Part 2
1 Timothy 2:10-11

Quote

One of the problems facing Timothy at Ephesus was the women in the church. Some were usurping the role of men, desiring to be the official teachers of the church. Others were desecrating the worship service by coming with wrong attitudes and dressing improperly. Their behavior contradicted their profession to know and worship God.

Quote

In spite of Jewish tradition, the Old Testament did not teach that women are inferior in spiritual matters. The Old Testament teaches that women are spiritually equal to men, but have a separate role.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Your understanding of early Christianity is about on a third grade level. You are dead wrong if you think only non-believers doubt that all the books in the NT are authentic and written by who they claim. When you choose to ignore the overwhelming evidence about the bible and still believe the bible is the inerrant word of God, it just shows your insecurity with your religion, Kind of like Muslim extremist.

So next time when go to church, be sure to leave your critical thinking skills at the door, grab your box of coloring crayons and have at it .

I quoted Dr. John MacArthur. He is one of the best theologians of our time. I think he's above a third grade level on this topic. I happen to agree with him and the early Church Father testimonies. Your attack doesn't surprise anyone and it certainly doesn't line up with the overwhelming belief and testimomy of church history.

Your doctor sounds like he quite the guy:



"He is also an advocate of Nouthetic Counseling, which stresses the Bible as a sufficient tool for counseling people with mental illnesses such as depression and anxiety. MacArthur rejects psychological theories and techniques, considering psychology and psychiatry as contrary to the Bible.[21] In Our Sufficiency in Christ: Three deadly influences that undermine your spiritual life MacArthur criticises "so-called Christian psychologists and psychiatrists who testified that the Bible alone does not contain sufficient help to meet people's deepest personal and emotional needs," and he claims "Such a thing as a 'psychological problem' unrelated to spiritual or physical causes is nonexistent." Concerning people who consult secular mental health professionals, MacArthur opines "Scripture hasn't failed them—they've failed Scripture."[22]
MacArthur has argued that "True psychology (i.e. "the study of the soul") can be done only by Christians, since only Christians have the resources for understanding and transforming the soul. The secular discipline of psychology is based on godless assumptions and evolutionary foundations and is capable of dealing with people only superficially and only on the temporal level... Psychology is no more a science than the atheistic evolutionary theory upon which it is based. Like theistic evolution, Christian psychology is an attempt to harmonize two inherently contradictory systems of thought. Modern psychology and the Bible cannot be blended without serious compromise to or utter abandonment of the principle of Scripture's sufficiency.... "[23]
His stance has caused several controversies, the most notable of which was the first time an employee of an evangelical church had ever been sued for malpractice.[24][25][26]
[edit]Creationism
MacArthur advocates Young Earth Creationism in his book, The Battle For the Beginning (2001), and in his sermons.[27] Speaking about evolution, he writes that Christians "ought to expose such lies for what they are and oppose them vigorously."
[edit]Other Christian movements and other religions
His writings are critical of other modern Christian movements such as those who run "seeker-friendly" church services such as Robert Schuller, Bill Hybels, and Rick Warren.[28]
Taking a strong stand against popular mega-church pastor Joel Osteen, Pastor MacArthur has spoken of him as a quasi-pantheist and proclaimed his teachings to be Satanic.[29]
He has also taught that Catholicism is "a Satanic religious system that wants to engulf the earth."[30]
He has also stated that the "theology of Islam is false," and that Allah is the "wrong god."[31][original research?] Although he is a proponent of Christian abstinence from alcohol, he does not teach it is necessarily sinful.[32][original research?] (See Christianity and alcohol".)
[edit]

From Wikipedia.


This is who I have been reading a lot of lately:

Biography of Bart D. Ehrman
Bart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He came to UNC in 1988, after four years of teaching at Rutgers University. At UNC he has served as both the Director of Graduate Studies and the Chair of the Department of Religious Studies.
A graduate of Wheaton College (Illinois), Professor Ehrman received both his Masters of Divinity and Ph.D. from Princeton Theological Seminary, where his 1985 doctoral dissertation was awarded magna cum laude. Since then he has published extensively in the fields of New Testament and Early Christianity, having written or edited twenty-four books, numerous scholarly articles, and dozens of book reviews.
Among his most recent books are a Greek-English edition of the Apostolic Fathers for the Loeb Classical Library (Harvard University Press), an assessment of the newly discovered Gospel of Judas (Oxford University Press), and three New York Times Bestsellers: Jesus Interrupted ( an account of scholarly views of the New Testament), God’s Problem (an assessment of the biblical views of suffering), and Misquoting Jesus (an overview of the changes found in the surviving copies of the New Testament and of the scribes who produced them). His books have been translated into twenty-seven languages.
Among his fields of scholarly expertise are the historical Jesus, the early Christian apocrypha, the apostolic fathers, and the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.
Professor Ehrman has served as President of the Southeast Region of the Society of Biblical literature, chair of the New Testament textual criticism section of the Society, book review editor of the Journal of Biblical Literature, and editor of the monograph series The New Testament in the Greek Fathers (Scholars Press). He currently serves as co-editor of the series New Testament Tools, Studies, and Documents (E. J. Brill), co-editor-in-chief for the journal Vigiliae Christianae, and on several other editorial boards for journals and monographs in the field.
Professor Ehrman lectures extensively throughout the country. Winner of numerous university awards and grants, he is the recipient of the 2009 J. W. Pope “Spirit of Inquiry” Teaching Award, the 1993 UNC Undergraduate Student Teaching Award, the 1994 Phillip and Ruth Hettleman Prize for Artistic and Scholarly Achievement, and the Bowman and Gordon Gray Award for excellence in teaching.
Professor Ehrman has two children, a daughter, Kelly, and a son, Derek. He is married to Sarah Beckwith (Ph.D., King's College London), Marcello Lotti Professor of English at Duke University. He lives in Durham, North Carolina.

[stevebabin 0]

Quote

Quote

Your understanding of early Christianity is about on a third grade level. You are dead wrong if you think only non-believers doubt that all the books in the NT are authentic and written by who they claim. When you choose to ignore the overwhelming evidence about the bible and still believe the bible is the inerrant word of God, it just shows your insecurity with your religion, Kind of like Muslim extremist.

So next time when go to church, be sure to leave your critical thinking skills at the door, grab your box of coloring crayons and have at it .

I quoted Dr. John MacArthur. He is one of the best theologians of our time. I think he's above a third grade level on this topic. I happen to agree with him and the early Church Father testimonies. Your attack doesn't surprise anyone and it certainly doesn't line up with the overwhelming belief and testimomy of church history.

"Best theologian"....reminds me of a joke I heard recently about competing in the Special Olympics.

When you say "Best Theologian", what I hear is "of all the delusional people studying his imaginary friend, he's near the top."

"Science, logic and reason will fly you to the moon. Religion will fly you into buildings."
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

"Best theologian"....reminds me of a joke I heard recently about competing in the Special Olympics.

When you say "Best Theologian", what I hear is "of all the delusional people studying his imaginary friend, he's near the top."

Very mature.

[jaybird18c 24]

Dr. John MacArthur is right on! One can disagree with what the bible says about these things but it is in fact what the bible says about these things. Added: And he and I both ultimately trust God's word (which does not change) over man's fallible methods/theories (which change all the time). I'm not saying that these psycological studies/research aren't valuable. Much of it is. However, it's all about what your foundation is.

The Bible’s Sufficiency
The whole counsel of God, concerning al things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the word [already implied in I/v]; and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the word, which are always to be observed. (WCF, I/vi, emphasis added)

“It is the spirit of God, working immediately and directly by and with the Word of God in the hearts of men, who imparts spiritual life!”
– A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith by Dr. Robert L. Reymond
(another one of the best theologians of our time)

Biography of Dr. Robert L. Reymond
Robert L. Reymond is a Christian theologian of the Protestant Reformed tradition. He is best known for his New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith (1998). Reymond holds B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. degrees from Bob Jones University and has taught at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis, Missouri and at Knox Theological Seminary in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. After resigning from Knox in January 2008, he accepted a call as regular pulpit supply of Holy Trinity Presbyterian Church, a new congregation in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.
Reymond has written a book on Paul entitled Paul Missionary Theologian (2003) and another about Jesus called Jesus Divine Messiah (2003). Other books include a short biography called John Calvin: His Life and Influence (2004) and Contending for the Faith: Lines in the Sand That Strengthen the Church (2005), The God-Centered Preacher, The Reformation's Conflict with Rome: Why It Must Continue, What is God, and The Lamb of God.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Reymond holds B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. degrees from Bob Jones University

Bob Jones university???........... shit!!! You need say no more. Had I known your Guy hailed from that bastion of higher learning, hell I would have stopped arguing long ago. No blacks aloud until 30 years a ago, no inter-racial dating until a few years ago, Bob Jones is good people. I just love those Christian values.

Bob Jones University, the Bible college in Greenville, South Carolina, did not admit black students until the 1970s. Then, for a 30-year period, interracial dating was prohibited. Now the university has announced that its polices were wrong.

[masterrig 1]

At least, they admitted their mistake.


Chuck

[stevebabin 0]

Quote

Quote

"Best theologian"....reminds me of a joke I heard recently about competing in the Special Olympics.

When you say "Best Theologian", what I hear is "of all the delusional people studying his imaginary friend, he's near the top."

Very mature.

The things you post on here make absolutely no sense to me as a rational, thinking, adult Human Being. The post I made that you find immature was intended to help you understand my perspective.

It will continue to baffle me why anyone would still believe in anything "supernatural"... It's complete horseshit. Humankind would be better off with a reality based ethic. Relegating this mythology crap to the past can't happen soon enough.

"Science, logic and reason will fly you to the moon. Religion will fly you into buildings."
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."

[jaybird18c 24]

Okay...I think your attempt at character assasination is silly, but, that aside, what about the Westminster Confession of Faith...which is where that quote actually originated?
Or, what Wayne Grudem (another great theologian) had to say about it?

***The sufficiency of scripture means that scripture contained all the words of God he intended his people to have at each stage of redemptive history, and that it now contains all the words of God we need for salvation, for trusting him perfectly, and for obeying him perfectly."
(Grudem's Systematic Theology, pg. 127)

What I'm getting at is that there is wide agreement in what they're saying with regard to historical Christianity as opposed to the crap you and your references are putting out.

Added: Dr. Wayne A. Grudem (born 1948) is a Protestant theologian and author.

Grudem holds a BA from Harvard University, a Master of Divinity from Westminster Theological Seminary, and a PhD from the University of Cambridge. In 2001, Grudem became Research Professor of Theology and Biblical Studies at Phoenix Seminary. Prior to that, he had taught for 20 years at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, where he was chairman of the department of Biblical and Systematic Theology.[1]

Grudem served on the committee overseeing the English Standard Version translation of the Bible, and from 2005 to 2008 he served as General Editor for the 2.1 million-word ESV Study Bible (which was named "2009 Christian Book of the Year" by the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association). In 1999 he was the president of the Evangelical Theological Society.[1] He is a co-founder and past president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.[1] He is the author of, among other books, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, which advocates a Calvinistic soteriology, the verbal plenary inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible, the body-soul dichotomy in the nature of man, and the complementarian view of gender relationships. Grudem also edited (with John Piper) Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (which was named “Book of the Year” by Christianity Today in 1992). Zondervan released his new book, Politics According to the Bible on September 23, 2010.[2]

Added: By the way, I think he's got higher than a 3rd grade education also.

[Channman 2]

I'm enjoying your exchange with JimBob...i

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

The things you post on here make absolutely no sense to me as a rational, thinking, adult Human Being. The post I made that you find immature was intended to help you understand my perspective.

I fully understand how this all would not make any sense to a "rational, thinking, adult" atheist/humanist. However, it makes perfect sense to a "rational, thinking, adult" Christian.

[billvon 2,991]

>What if Jesus didn't die on the cross?

What if he didn't? What if he was so close to death that no one (at that time) could tell if he really was dead?

Who cares? Does it change his message, or what he went through? Does it change the amount he suffered? (Heck, if he wasn't dead he arguably suffered more.)

Might be a good thing to have a religious war about, but overall doesn't seem too important.

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

>What if Jesus didn't die on the cross?

What if he didn't? What if he was so close to death that no one (at that time) could tell if he really was dead?

Who cares? Does it change his message, or what he went through? Does it change the amount he suffered? (Heck, if he wasn't dead he arguably suffered more.)

Might be a good thing to have a religious war about, but overall doesn't seem too important.

It changes EVERYTHING Billvon. Aside from the fact that the theory you just described doesn't line up with the events recorded in scripture, theologically, it would be tragic. It would mean that no one past, present, or future could have a right standing before God. Jesus did not come in the flesh to show us a better way to live (although, his examples do in fact help us). He came in order to live a perfect sinless life (which is impossible for us) and to stand in our "law place" suffering the just penalty for "our" transgressions. THAT is the point. If Jesus didn't die and if he wasn't raised from the dead, then none of us should place our faith in it. Christianity stands or falls on the resurrection. It is the biggest dilemma in Christianity. If God is just (which he is), he cannot forgive you (because he is holy & perfect). "He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD. (Proverbs 17:15). We are living in rebellion against a thrice holy God. Our solution to this problem could only be provided by God himself. Only Jesus Christ could stand in our place because ONLY he is worthy. The dilemma is settled by him and explained very well in Romans 3:23-26 which states "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." If Jesus didn't die, then God is a liar (which is impossible) and cannot be BOTH just and the justifier of wicked men (and women).

Added: All of this would not upset anyone if Jesus had only said He was "a way" and not "The Way." Nobody gets this upset over Buddha, Vishnu, Baal, the FSM, Muhammad, Fred the pagan god, worshiping cows, trees, or wales....pick your idol... Non-Christians/unbelievers applaud someone's "search for truth" but those same people are almost willing to crucify anyone arrogant enough to say they've found it. Strange how Jesus said there would be this kind of contention.

[stevebabin 0]

Quote

Quote

The things you post on here make absolutely no sense to me as a rational, thinking, adult Human Being. The post I made that you find immature was intended to help you understand my perspective.

I fully understand how this all would not make any sense to a "rational, thinking, adult" atheist/humanist. However, it makes perfect sense to a "rational, thinking, adult" Christian.

The term "Rational Christian" is an oxymoron. To be a Christian requires the suspension of rational thought... If there was ANY objective evidence for the existance of god, this wouldn't be the case.

"Science, logic and reason will fly you to the moon. Religion will fly you into buildings."
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."

[winsor 236]

Quote

Dr. John MacArthur is right on! One can disagree with what the bible says about these things but it is in fact what the bible says about these things. Added: And he and I both ultimately trust God's word (which does not change) over man's fallible methods/theories (which change all the time). I'm not saying that these psycological studies/research aren't valuable. Much of it is. However, it's all about what your foundation is.

The Bible’s Sufficiency
The whole counsel of God, concerning al things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the word [already implied in I/v]; and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the word, which are always to be observed. (WCF, I/vi, emphasis added)

“It is the spirit of God, working immediately and directly by and with the Word of God in the hearts of men, who imparts spiritual life!”
– A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith by Dr. Robert L. Reymond
(another one of the best theologians of our time)

Biography of Dr. Robert L. Reymond
Robert L. Reymond is a Christian theologian of the Protestant Reformed tradition. He is best known for his New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith (1998). Reymond holds B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. degrees from Bob Jones University and has taught at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis, Missouri and at Knox Theological Seminary in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. After resigning from Knox in January 2008, he accepted a call as regular pulpit supply of Holy Trinity Presbyterian Church, a new congregation in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.
Reymond has written a book on Paul entitled Paul Missionary Theologian (2003) and another about Jesus called Jesus Divine Messiah (2003). Other books include a short biography called John Calvin: His Life and Influence (2004) and Contending for the Faith: Lines in the Sand That Strengthen the Church (2005), The God-Centered Preacher, The Reformation's Conflict with Rome: Why It Must Continue, What is God, and The Lamb of God.

Do you rate Phrenologists as well?

[winsor 236]

Quote

Quote

The things you post on here make absolutely no sense to me as a rational, thinking, adult Human Being. The post I made that you find immature was intended to help you understand my perspective.

I fully understand how this all would not make any sense to a "rational, thinking, adult" atheist/humanist. However, it makes perfect sense to a "rational, thinking, adult" Christian.

Oxymoron.

[jaybird18c 24]

Quote

The term "Rational Christian" is an oxymoron. To be a Christian requires the suspension of rational thought... If there was ANY objective evidence for the existance of god, this wouldn't be the case.

Opinions...everybody's got one. However, I have an answer for the existence of everything and you don't. You have to believe that everything just popped out of nothing and became organized on its own. That sounds like suspension of rational thought to me. I say you're sitting on the objective evidence. You have no answer so you just continue to criticize the source.

[jaybird18c 24]

winsor