Conquer Club

Ok, after several pages of futile debate about the role of religion in public life, I think we need to get to the heart of the issue.

Is it true?

Is Jesus Christ really fully man and fully God? Did He come to earth and live the only perfect life and die on the cross for our sins? Was He actually bodily resurrected and taken back to heaven where He sits at the Father's right hand? Was all authority truly given to Him? Is His name really the only one by which we may be saved?

If this is false, Christians are wasting their time and are to be "pitied above all men" as Paul himself wrote in 1 Corinthians 15.

If it is true, however, He absolutely should be at the very center of everything, both private *and public*. In fact, to NOT give Him a central position in everything would be downright insane. If it is true, then schools should teach about Him and His ways, and not allow for any other opinions!

Of course, we disagree on whether these statements are indeed true. I believe, however, that by reason and logic we can make a very good case that they are indeed true.

Enough for now, I'll be back.

yodermk wrote:Ok, after several pages of futile debate about the role of religion in public life, I think we need to get to the heart of the issue.

Is it true?

Actually, that's not the heart of the issue.

If it is true, however, He absolutely should be at the very center of everything, both private *and public*. In fact, to NOT give Him a central position in everything would be downright insane. If it is true, then schools should teach about Him and His ways, and not allow for any other opinions!

Why?

Of course, we disagree on whether these statements are indeed true. I believe, however, that by reason and logic we can make a very good case that they are indeed true.

Okay, try me. If you can actually make a good case using reason and logic, (and I mean the good reason and logic, not the ridiculous Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort logic), then you should post it here.

Snorri1234 wrote:Actually, that's not the heart of the issue.

Why not? Shouldn't the ultimate truth of reality be the guiding principle behind everything?

Why?

See above. Seriously, if you disagree, why? If you could know with 100% certainty that Jesus is everything the Bible says He is, should He NOT be the center of everything?

Okay, try me. If you can actually make a good case using reason and logic, (and I mean the good reason and logic, not the ridiculous Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort logic), then you should post it here.

I will. Need to go to bed now though (I work nights). I'll start tomorrow.

yodermk wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Actually, that's not the heart of the issue.

Why not? Shouldn't the ultimate truth of reality be the guiding principle behind everything?

That's not my point. I know for a fact that not everyone will agree even if you proved it to be true. There are still people who walk around claiming that the earth is flat and that we're being watched by aliens all the time.
Since you'll never be able to prove it's true, it's silly to say that's the heart of the matter.

Yodermk
Yes if its true then he should be at the centre of everything, as should God to sort out all the ills in the World. However I have been told often enough that it is our responsibility to improve the planet,not Gods, so we must decide the best course and believing in supernatural myths is not a very sound start is it. There have been countless deaths over the centuries directly caused by one religion persecuting another, so the logic of further promoting more of the same rather escapes me.

Snorri1234 wrote:Okay, try me. If you can actually make a good case using reason and logic, (and I mean the good reason and logic, not the ridiculous Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort logic), then you should post it here.

That's one of the most annoyingly stupid things I've ever seen. I was ready to switch it off at 7.30 when they started comparing the human body to a car. They even say it themselves, they can't win by being rational, they can only convince people by appealing to their emotions.

I'm very much looking forward to an attempt different from theirs.

yodermk wrote:Ok, after several pages of futile debate about the role of religion in public life, I think we need to get to the heart of the issue.

Is it true?

Is Jesus Christ really fully man and fully God? Did He come to earth and live the only perfect life and die on the cross for our sins? Was He actually bodily resurrected and taken back to heaven where He sits at the Father's right hand? Was all authority truly given to Him? Is His name really the only one by which we may be saved?

If this is false, Christians are wasting their time and are to be "pitied above all men" as Paul himself wrote in 1 Corinthians 15.

If it is true, however, He absolutely should be at the very center of everything, both private *and public*. In fact, to NOT give Him a central position in everything would be downright insane. If it is true, then schools should teach about Him and His ways, and not allow for any other opinions!

Of course, we disagree on whether these statements are indeed true. I believe, however, that by reason and logic we can make a very good case that they are indeed true.

Enough for now, I'll be back.

This is where the insane asylums come in. You think that sky daddy, who for some reason hasn't shown himself since accurate, recorded history began, sent down his son to his death? You really think that is the meaning of the world? It's a sad life to dedicate yourself to a guy whose been dead for two thousand years.

Research mithras.

Daddy1gringo,

If you're still out there I've got a question for you. Hopefully you're still reading this thread.

yodermk wrote:Ok, after several pages of futile debate about the role of religion in public life, I think we need to get to the heart of the issue.

Is it true?

Is Jesus Christ really fully man and fully God? Did He come to earth and live the only perfect life and die on the cross for our sins? Was He actually bodily resurrected and taken back to heaven where He sits at the Father's right hand? Was all authority truly given to Him? Is His name really the only one by which we may be saved?

If this is false, Christians are wasting their time and are to be "pitied above all men" as Paul himself wrote in 1 Corinthians 15.

If it is true, however, He absolutely should be at the very center of everything, both private *and public*. In fact, to NOT give Him a central position in everything would be downright insane. If it is true, then schools should teach about Him and His ways, and not allow for any other opinions!

Of course, we disagree on whether these statements are indeed true. I believe, however, that by reason and logic we can make a very good case that they are indeed true.

Enough for now, I'll be back.

Are you one of the Jesus Freaks? I don't see it in your signature.

CoffeeCream wrote:

yodermk wrote:Ok, after several pages of futile debate about the role of religion in public life, I think we need to get to the heart of the issue.

Is it true?

Is Jesus Christ really fully man and fully God? Did He come to earth and live the only perfect life and die on the cross for our sins? Was He actually bodily resurrected and taken back to heaven where He sits at the Father's right hand? Was all authority truly given to Him? Is His name really the only one by which we may be saved?

If this is false, Christians are wasting their time and are to be "pitied above all men" as Paul himself wrote in 1 Corinthians 15.

If it is true, however, He absolutely should be at the very center of everything, both private *and public*. In fact, to NOT give Him a central position in everything would be downright insane. If it is true, then schools should teach about Him and His ways, and not allow for any other opinions!

Of course, we disagree on whether these statements are indeed true. I believe, however, that by reason and logic we can make a very good case that they are indeed true.

Enough for now, I'll be back.

Are you one of the Jesus Freaks? I don't see it in your signature.

hes a fairly new member...id imagine if he would like he could be in a short time.

Part of the problem with such a notion is that you must necesarily take on faith that jesus, his life, the teachings in the bible so on so forth are true. Ive spoke with a fair number of people, and through commentaries and different sources, a lot of things are taken at different levels by people. So immediately you have to wonder, whose truth it is in fact, since we dont really seem to be able to grasp universal truths, should they exist.

Another issue, is that by assuming that jesus is in some way the complete truth, we disregard the notion that many believe their different faiths are in fact just as truthful as xianty. Who is to say that mohammed is not the latest in the line of prophets and that islam is not the truth. Why not follow the teachings of the dalai lama?

There are certainly some kernels of truth probably in every world religion, big and small. To assume that because a segement of the population may believe a particular faith is the truth, and have their own subjective reasonings for it, does not mean you could approach making a state religion out of it. Which to some extent would be the natural result of involving religion to a very large degree in terms of public policy and life. These notions simply do not fit into a modern representative democracy as the notions of truth of the many forms of christianity, do not represent the notions of all of the population.

MeDeFe wrote:Nice idea, but that still makes us humans nothing more than machines that function according to preset mathematical functions. Change the input and the output becomes different, but the function itself remains the same, static, unable to change itself.

A very bleak vision I think.

MeDe Fe, don't be absurd (Gandalf would add, "If you can help it.") I'm not saying that it's just like this story of a celestial computer spreadsheet. Then we'd have to find out if the Allmighty uses Mac or PC.

(Don't worry, everybody, I'm not starting the misplaced flame war again, MDF and I have a "noble adversary" relationship from another thread {which I do intend to get back to})

I'm just saying that this is an example of how free will can coexist with omniscience. Surely if there is a God who is outside of time and space, he can come up with a better system, without the problems you describe, than we can from our 4-dimensional experience.

CoffeeCream wrote:Daddy1gringo,

If you're still out there I've got a question for you. Hopefully you're still reading this thread.

Yes, I'm still here, and intending to get back to you on John Ch.3 as well as working off line on a kind of long post getting back to your original question. I've been a little tied up w/ other things lately, and a little discouraged at the bitter turn the thread took for a while. I'm glad it seems to be calming down and getting back on track.

A question? sure, shoot.

daddy1gringo wrote:Then we'd have to find out if the Allmighty uses Mac or PC.

Oh no...

Who's who?

CoffeeCream wrote:(yodermk)Are you one of the Jesus Freaks? I don't see it in your signature.

Yes, yodermk is one of the newest members of the Jesus Freaks(JFC). I saw one of his posts here a couple days ago and asked him if he wanted to join. I officially added him yesterday I think. For a full list of everybody in the JFC, simply CLICK HERE.

Note: Not everybody in the Jesus Freaks uses the signature as it is not required, simply encouraged. That is why the above link may be useful to figure out who's in and who's not in the JFC.

Why JFC? Jesus Freak Cult?

unriggable wrote:Why JFC? Jesus Freak Cult?

Um...clan...dude. Jesus Freaks Clan.

daddy1gringo wrote:A question? sure, shoot.

Actually 2 questions from John 5:

1. Jesus healed a man at Bethesda. There were a number of people there suffering. Why didn't he heal all of them, or at least more of them?

2. "Jesus gave them this answer: 'I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

Other Christians tell me that the Father & the Son are equal. Huh? It seems like he is contradicting himself here.

CoffeeCream wrote:

daddy1gringo wrote:A question? sure, shoot.

Actually 2 questions from John 5:

1. Jesus healed a man at Bethesda. There were a number of people there suffering. Why didn't he heal all of them, or at least more of them?

2. "Jesus gave them this answer: 'I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

Other Christians tell me that the Father & the Son are equal. Huh? It seems like he is contradicting himself here.

Ok to prove a point go run a mile only using one of your feet. See, even though both of your feet are equal, one foot cannot do what feet are supposed to do without the other foot also doing it.

Snorri1234 wrote:That's not my point. I know for a fact that not everyone will agree even if you proved it to be true. There are still people who walk around claiming that the earth is flat and that we're being watched by aliens all the time.
Since you'll never be able to prove it's true, it's silly to say that's the heart of the matter.

Well maybe I wasn't being completely practical given the conditions of the world at the moment. I'm saying how it *should* be, not how it *will* be.

My question is: IF Jesus is everything the Bible says, then He MUST be the center of everything.

Does anyone disagree with that?

joecoolfrog wrote:Yes if its true then he should be at the centre of everything,

Thanks.

as should God to sort out all the ills in the World.

I for one believe He would do exactly that if we gave Him His rightful place as the center of everything!

If you look through the Old Testament at the history of Israel, whenever they repented of sins and turned back to God, they had great success. Whenever they turned away, disaster struck.

I think you can see a similar trend in America. Although we were never a truly Christian nation, there was never really an assault on God in public life until the last few decades. In the same timespan in which school problems turned from chewing gum in class to toting (and using) loaded guns.

There have been countless deaths over the centuries directly caused by one religion persecuting another, so the logic of further promoting more of the same rather escapes me.

It gets back to what is *true*. There really is absolute reality. Relativism is bollocks. At most one worldview can have complete truth.

To rephrase my question above, IF atheism is true, then God should have NO part in public life. IF Islam is true, then everyone should be strongly encouraged to pray 5 times a day towards Mecca and follow its other commandments. And so on.

(And, I don't think any religion should persecute any other, for what it's worth.)

unriggable wrote:This is where the insane asylums come in. You think that sky daddy, who for some reason hasn't shown himself since accurate, recorded history began, sent down his son to his death? You really think that is the meaning of the world? It's a sad life to dedicate yourself to a guy whose been dead for two thousand years.

Looks like *somebody* is starting with a preconception that it could not possibly be true, no matter what ...

yodermk wrote:My question is: IF Jesus is everything the Bible says, then He MUST be the center of everything.

Does anyone disagree with that?

Not really. But that is totally not the issue. It doesn't matter whether it's true, unless you can prove it is and convince everyone. And since you can't do that, the issue is therefore not whether it's true or not.

Yodermk

It does rather beg the question;
Why does God not simply give the World a clear message - then the truth would be known would it not ?

Ps Please dont say he already has done in Jesus

All right. To lay the foundation, I assert that faith must be testable. And lack of faith should be testable. Whatever your worldview is, it should be supported by reality.

The Bible says to "test all things, hold fast to that which is good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

I hope all of you are willing to test your worldview. If you aren't, how secure are you in it, really?

Consider a certain king of the Incas of around the time Machu Picchu was being built. Now, the Incas are famous for worshiping the sun god Inti. But this king thought about it, and he discovered some problems:

1. The sun just does the same thing all the time. It always travels the same path and does nothing original.

2. The sun can be obscured by clouds.

So, if the sun is god, why does it always do the same thing and how can it be obscured by a mere part of creation?

(Just to add: I have personally been to the rock on Isla del Sol in Lake Titicaca where creation of the world supposedly happened. It is ..... a rock. And not all that spectacular of one.)

So this king realized that the sun must not be god after all. He then wondered who the real God must be, and found it -- in his own culture. Centuries before, the Incas believed in Viracocha, the omnipotent creator of all things, in character and description extremely similar to the God of the Bible.

There is a fascinating book called Eternity in their Hearts by Don Richardson that documents the fact that this is common in "primitive" tribal peoples all over the world. Combine that with the fact that the Bible says that God is evident in nature and that He has not left Himself without witness.

Next time, and I'll probably get to it in the middle of the night tonight: What we know about the universe puts absolute limits on the qualifications of something that can be the real God. We'll take a look.

CoffeeCream wrote:

daddy1gringo wrote:A question? sure, shoot.

Actually 2 questions from John 5:

1. Jesus healed a man at Bethesda. There were a number of people there suffering. Why didn't he heal all of them, or at least more of them?

2. "Jesus gave them this answer: 'I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

Other Christians tell me that the Father & the Son are equal. Huh? It seems like he is contradicting himself here.

While I may not be a member of JFC, I believe I may be able to shed some light on that second question.

While the concept of Jesus being God and Son of God at the same time, is at first confusing, and counter-intuitive, it really is realistic and not overly contradictory. Jesus was not merely the physical embodiment of God on Earth....in the OT, God the father walked the earth a number of different times. Jesus was on earth for a number of reasons. The most obvious was for the atonment of the sins of the world. In the OT, sacrifices were made for atonement....the Passover being the most famous one in Exodus. Jesus is referred to as the passover lamb because of the plague in Egypt in Exodus when the lord "passed over" those houses that were under the blood of the lamb. Jesus was who was used for 'The Blood' and 'The Lamb'. A divine atonement, if you will, that would suffice for all the sins of mankind.

Another reason was to show the world that living and fulfilling God's commandments was not impossible. In the OT, so many rules and sacrifices were made because the Jews kept sinning....Jesus was tested and fulfilled the Law. Jesus himself said "I have not come to do away with the law, but to fulfill it."

How does this address the issue of "equality of Jesus and God?" God <i>humbled himself!!</i> by being born and going through the entire life process from conception to a murderous death. "Unnecessary" naysayers may say, however...have you ever had the privelage of serving or working for someone who had gone through the same things you have?....or the not-so-great pleasure of serving/working for someone who dictates to you, and yet has never experienced the same things as you? Or have you worked with a supervisor who was willing to get down and dirty with you, and wasn't "above" the duties you had to do? What if Gates was in the programming labs in Microsoft? What if Bush was fighting in Iraq himself? Like them or not, they would receive a lot more respect. The supreme ruler and creator of the universe lived the life of a man, all the way to the point where he was murdered on a crucifix! Jesus in the New Testement was not on earth to rule. That is why he constantly made defference to God the Father.

Please, if anything appears to be unclear, let me know. I am typing this at work and am not entirely certain that the information is organized in the best possible way. If anything needs clarifying, please ask so that I may explain myself better.

Ok ... What the universe says about the qualities of God

In the early 1900s, the dominant view of cosmology was that the universe always existed in a state similar to that in which it is today. That suited naturalists just fine -- it gave a virtually infinite amount of time for the origins of life and evolution.

Of course, Einstein, Hubble, and others discovered an inconvenient truth: The universe has been expanding. Observations combined with general relativity made us conclude that the universe started as a singularity, the Big Bang.

Through relativity we also conclude that time and space dimensions themselves came into existence at the very same moment as all the matter and energy in the universe. String theory adds (if true) that there may be about 6 more spacial dimensions tightly curled up around the three we are familiar with. These also would have come into existence at the Big Bang.

Of course given the law of cause and effect, it is irrational to believe the Big Bang could have happened unless something caused it. The question is *what* caused it -- a major area where atheistic and Christian worldviews diverge.

If there is no God, then some kind of "stuff" would have had to cause it. Of course, even the wildest theoretical physics would have a hard time explaining something like that.

If there is a God, then obviously He must be the cause of the Big Bang. Furthermore, any God who can truly be the omnipotent God of all creation would have had responsibility for creating the universe. This says that God must have the property of existing completely outside of all space and time dimensions and must have the ability to create them at will.

At this point, one would be reasonable in saying "we simply don't know", and it would simply be a preference as to where to put your faith. After all, it doesn't really make sense that anything should exist, whether it be a God or some "quantum foam" or whatever. But let's continue to build on both the atheistic and theistic foundations and see what happens.

We also see in cosmology, and this is pretty much universally agreed upon, that the universe is incredibly fine-tuned. If any of the fundamental constants were different by the tiniest margin, no life of any kind would be possible at any time or place in the universe. All these constants (gravitation constant, electromagnetic constant, strong and weak nuclear forces, the amount of mass of the universe, and other things) control the expansion rate of the universe. If the expansion rate had been faster by one part in ten to the 50th, metal-rich stars would not have formed. Slower by one part in ten to the 50th, and the universe would have collapsed on itself. Either way, no life of any kind is possible.

This fine-tuning was compounded in the late 1990s when the Boomerang experiment in Antarctica showed that the space energy density had to be fine tuned to one part in ten to the 120th for there to be any life. (Ok, to be honest, I don't fully understand all that as I'm not a physicist, so be gentle with the questions. ) This number does not come from a creationist source, but The Astrophysical Journal. (I don't have a link handy, but I know it's on the web and could possibly find it again.)

The greatest instrument man has devised has an accuracy of somewhere around one in ten to the 25th. And that is only a measurement instrument, not a creation tool. This gives us another important attribute of God: He is at least (120 - 25 =) 95 orders of magnitude more precise than our best scientists and engineers!

In my next post I will show that the Bible says that about God. In the meantime, here is a chance to put YOUR religious worldview to the test. Is YOUR God able to create space and time dimensions at will, and is He intelligent, creative, and precise beyond our wildest ability to imagine?

Really, you're arguing from an impossible view. You're saying that because everything fits together so perfectly it has to be god. But if it didn't fit together perfectly we wouldn't be sitting here typing, because we wouldn't exist. Who is to say that our universe isn't the millionth try?

It's like saying Ray Comfort has a point when he explains that bananas fit our hands so perfectly that god must exist....