Dan56

My comment wasn't specific to you.. I'm aware that your agnostic and are in a constant state of "I don't know".. I was just amused that an atheist who completely disbelieves in the existence of God, will simultaneously entertain the idea that life exist on other planets, despite the absence of objective evidence to prove either is true.. It goes to show that people choose to personally believe whatever seems likely, plausible, or rational to them. Whereas, one persons belief is mocked as a far fetched myth, while the perception of their own unproven belief is portrayed as a unique possibility.

This is true, most believe it was a worldwide flood, but I don't. Yes.. The entire old testament pretty much illustrates that, it mainly follows the people of which Messiah would come.. Salvation came to all afterwards. That's my thinking, a worldwide flood would have destroyed everything. When something seems illogical, its usually being misinterpreted. http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html

We can also hold out the possibility that God exist. That is being open minded...And that was my simple point. The double standard is when Atheist reject the existence of God due to a lack of evidence, while simultaneously accepting without any evidence that there could be life on other planets.

Well, the shoe is certainly on the other foot now... As you guys always say, "I'm afraid I'm going to need some objective evidence"... All you have is a belief, with no verifiable facts. Until you have some definitive proof of life elsewhere, all you have is conjecture and faith in an unsubstantiated myth.. It seems strange the an Intelligent Designer is beyond your comprehension, but little green men from Mars is a distinct possibility that your eager to endorse.. And you think I'm gullible?

Disobedience isn't a trap, Eve was given a choice, and she chose death.. God gave man dominion over all the earth (Genesis 1:26), so all life suffers and dies in a fallen world. The only thing 'unjust' is mankind, we wanted the knowledge of evil and God delivered it big time. The mauled young men got off lucky, mocking God has serious repercussions.. Sin=death, Christ willingly paid that price for the remission of our sins. As I said, we perceive things completely different, where you see a cruel and unjust God, I see a compassionate and loving God. It didn't happen like you perceive it did. The bible follows God's own people (the descendants of Adam). All of their land flooded (the world they occupied). Whereby, fish did not die, neither did all plant life (Genesis 8:11). India, Australia, Europe, the US, and most of China was not affected by Noah's flood.

Its not a contradiction, life has only been found to exist on one planet. As far as the microbes on Mars, I don't personally believe it. https://www.space.com/33690-allen-hills-mars-meteorite-alien-life-20-years.html

It helps the context if you finish my entire sentence (God can change what He knows what may have otherwise happened). The natural course of things of what will occur can be changed by an omnipotent Being. God may know that I'll drive my car off a cliff, but God can intervene and prevent what would have otherwise happened. God knows the future, but he's capable of making adjustments too. For instance, there are 19 verses in the bible where God changed His mind. Christ is a perfect example, we were all headed to hell, but Jesus intervened. "Whosoever believeth" is a choice, I don't believe God knows who will choose to come to repentance. If He did, then this whole human experience would be an exercise in futility. If God already knew the outcome of every human being, He could skip this trial in the flesh and go straight to judgement.

Of course not... I simply have a source that says God was the uncaused cause of all that is..... You guys have zip.... But if you ever discover the unknown origin of the universe, I'm all ears.

Yes, the possibility of life on other planets exist, its just a matter of revealing it, but the same can be said of God. Scientist are hoping and so are Christians. The bible says that God created the heavens, so I'm not sure how the universe suggest the Genesis story is nonsense? And discovering a long extinct biblical city like Jericho is more than a pile of rocks, discovering a stone plaque with King Davids name on it, or one with Pontius Pilate's name in the ruins of Caesarea, is factual archaeological evidence that these places and people actually existed. I'd disagree, If God could still exist, then it certainly does matter and is not meaningless... Its like saying that if the stock market collapses and if the economy tanks, it doesn't matter. But surely you recognize that there are severe consequences when that "IF" is realized. A faithful person builds a storm shelter in case a tornado hits, an unfaithful person perishes "if" a tornado strikes. Its a declaration of no objective verifiable facts, that's the only type of evidence these guys find acceptable.. Just as no one has the necessary evidence to confirm God, neither have they facts to confirm life exist elsewhere. Evidence swings both ways. My point was that in the absence of observable evidence, its necessary to draw rational conclusions based on what is most likely evident. The bible says God put mankind on earth, we've seen no life existing elsewhere, so based on the absence any contrary evidence, the truth leans towards the credibility of the bible.

Yes , it was a big deal, it demonstrated life after death. What preceded it was horrible, but it demonstrated the love of God, and not a mean, vengeful, or sadistic bully. You can't spin it any other way. God is omniscient, but we make independent decisions and our choices can be altered by circumstance. God can change what He knows what may have otherwise happened, because He is also omnipotent. Eve was given the freedom of choice, the bear mauling was a tough lesson taught for mocking God, the flood eliminated wickedness/evil, and the crucifixion established salvation. We obviously perceive things differently, all the actions you deem as bad were actions and corrections taken to necessitate a longer term good.

Billions of planets and life sprung forth on just one of them, that's evidence of creation or unbelievable happenstance. I suspect that if you guys saw a pile of ashes where a house once stood, you would not believe the house burnt down because you didn't see it happen. Sometimes evidence is just a matter of putting 2+2 together, you don't always need observable evidence to confirm the obvious. Life just magically appeared from nothing or life is the result of intelligent design, the rational conclusion is the latter.

"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:13). Hardly the definition of a bully? "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep" (John 10:11). Nothing sadistic about that.. And He doesn't know your thoughts before you have them, remember what He said to Abraham, "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son." (Genesis 22:12).

No, it was not a direct bible quote, but I was actually sugar-coating it for the sake of those who are easily offended; "The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 13:41-42). So "unpleasant experience" seemed like a mild and less-threatening description of all that's written about the fate of nonbelievers.. Sometimes my extreme politeness boggles the mind

Eternal life is a persuasive means.... God desires your trust (faith), but He doesn't need it. I wasn't looking for converts, I was simply correcting some irrational and ridiculous biblical conclusions.. Like cuchulain saying that belief didn't matter. True... I only know that if I didn't believe the bible, nothing it says would threaten me. I gave a simplified explanation, but much of the wickedness was do to human contamination. Fallen angels produced nephilim, a biblical race of giants or demigods. Noah's family were the only pure undefiled descendants of Adam. But yes, sin survived of course, we are all born in sin. A&E were a test, and they failed.. The flood was a cleansing.. The Abrahamic covenant was a promise. God's plans never fail, people do.. Christ was the future, and that ultimate plan did not fail, because he is perfect in every way.

The evidence came and left, but don't worry, he said "I'll be back". Not believing now will make that second advent a very unpleasant experience. " He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (John 3:18) A&E freely chose evil, which is simply the result of disobedience to God.. God told them the consequences prior to their choice... God saw only wickedness in the world, the flood ended it. Sin survived, but there's also good now. The fig tree represents the nation of Israel in prophecy, Christ was not cursing the tree, but the bad figs (Israel). God has always forgiven the sin of the repentant. The sacrifice atoned for sin, the remission of sin erases our debts. Yes God has a temper, but He is patient and withholding his wrath so that even stubborn people have an opportunity to change their attitudes.

Your correct, in that it doesn't matter if God exist to people who don't believe, why would it? For people who don't know, it doesn't matter either. And for those who don't care, there's no reason to believe. It only matters to those who choose to believe, only believers have a reason to care. The working definition of God was Christ.

No, the Temple mount still exist and clearly shows where it stood. And Daniel's prophecy isn't just a story, it accurately predicted the 4 kingdoms in advance.. Isaiah died long before the forenamed King Cyrus was born. None of this is interpretation, but historical fact. Sodom & Gomorrah were literally destroyed with fire & brimstone, so of course there's no trace or remnant of the buildings. Point being, there's no twisting scripture to validate something like Daniel's prophecy, it says what it says, there are no gaps, the kingdoms he revealed by interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's dream were point blank accurate and each came into power in the order that Daniel predicted. The story can't be wrong because history has proven it right.

Those verses aren't relevant, they are simply commands to physically multiply. This verse is more applicable to my remark; "If anyone will not listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet" (Matthew 10:14 paraphrased).. Meaning that I simply testify why what I profess to believe is true, but I'm not trying to force my faith onto others...... I couldn't even if I wanted to, its an individual choice everyone must make for themselves. You guys are really into that Bye Bye emoji.

Archeology isn't proof per se, but it is evidence that the cities existed and that people mentioned also existed at the time. When landmarks and historical figures are real and accurate, it lends credibility that the authors recording said events were not fabricating a fairy tale. Imo, it requires more belief to spin it off as something faked. You can certainly write-off fulfilled prophecies as a hoax, but I choose to believe them because it would have required one hell of a collaborated effort to pull off the greatest scam in history. Plus, how do you explain the prophecy in Daniel 7? There is absolutely no way that this future prophecy predicting the rise & fall of 4 ruling kingdoms could have been arranged to coincide with future events ( Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, & Rome). Quite a coincidence eh? Not to mention Christ predicting that he would rise from his grave in 3 days. Even with Roman soldiers guarding the tomb, there's no body. And the predicted destruction of the temple, Rome obviously destroyed it to coincide with prophecy too eh? Prophecy also predicted the Jews would reject Christ (Isaiah 6:9-10). Christ reiterated it (John 12:40, Matthew 13:14) and so did Paul (Acts28:26). Its no accident that they are blinded to this day, so it was written and so it is.. When you have so many prophecies come to pass and none that have failed or been proven false, the accumulative coincidences can certainly be construed and weighed as solid evidence by anyone with common sense.. Consider Isaiah's prophecy of King Cyrus of Persia in chapter 45, not only predicting it his reign 150 years in advance, but referring to him by name! Seems all of that biblical dogma has a remarkable record of accidental accuracy. There's comes a point where biblical stories and prophecies would fall apart if they were fabricated lies. But that hasn't happened for some unexplained reason. I guess its just very difficult, if not impossible to cast doubt on the truth. It makes no difference whether others take it or leave it, I'm just here stating my reasons for believing it.

Faith is required to accept something that is unproven, but faith is not a supposition void of substance (Hebrews 11:1). Faith is not blind, I've repeatedly pointed out archaeological, historical, and prophetic evidence that lend credibility to the Christian faith. For those who weigh this evidence and for those who study the message, it is substantive, convincing, reasonable, meaningful, and worthy of putting your hope and trust in. So while you are obviously unconvinced due to a lack of tangible facts, I'm guessing that your real objection is based on your disagreement with the message itself? And suffice to say, if you only have faith in something proven, you have no faith at all. Nothing wrong with trying to find and promote peaceful resolutions to conflicts and differences between people. A peaceful method does not always bring a diplomatic solution, but I agree that it should always be the first priority in resolving issues.

Better than another "I don't know nothing" statement from someone who believes nothing and is unable to have faith in anything. If all you can trust is what you have proven knowledge of, you have nothing else

God was made known in Christ, defined in Christ, manifested in Christ, and intervened through Christ... So its not that God was unable or unwilling to make Himself known, you guys just don't believe that He did. You seem to insist on direct evidence to be convinced, but God doesn't do repeat performances. The message was clear, defined, manifested, witnessed, recorded, and preserved. Today its either accepted by faith or rejected in misotheism.

Belief is knowledge, it answers a lot of questions that you can't. What facts do you have about where you came from, or for that matter where anything came from? You have nothing but vague speculative theories. Jesus said the Temple would be destroyed, it was. Jesus said he would rise from the grave, he did. Your claims that the temple is still there and Christ is still in his tomb are assertions made without evidence, so they can be dismissed without evidence. The 'evidence' that you require to substantiate facts were already demonstrated, you just weren't there to see it. God has intervened, you just weren't there to observe it. Because you have no verifiable evidence that proves any of it is false, your conclusions are as meaningless and irrelevant as those who believe its all true. You can dismiss the written record (bible), but that's no different than rejecting an affidavit that a witness provides for a court. The truth was shown, the truth was known, and the truth is believed. The existence of God is not irrelevant, there's nothing more important.

If I had no belief in God, if I had no knowledge of God, I wouldn't care about God myself... But fortunately, I wasn't content to remain ignorant, so I sought knowledge of God, then I came to believe in God, and now God cares about me.

There are many reasons for my choice... Put the New Testament to the test archaeologically, and it has been confirmed over and over again. Jesus alone claimed that he was God himself. Detailed material, eyewitnesses, and more written documentation of Christ than there is of Julius Caesar. The truth will not contradict itself and the bible doesn't. 100% accurate prophecies, which is evidence of divine influence. Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius, Krishna, etc, did not rise from the dead. Only Christ physically rose from the dead. I also believe that God reveals himself to those who earnestly seek him, its a spiritual revelation where one knows in their heart and is convicted of that one Truth. All this adds to the legitimacy and credibility of Christianity above all other religions. So for myself, I chose to follow Christ. But as Jonathan said, its a decision based in faith, and part of that faith is denying all other beliefs. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." (Exodus 20:3)