by Christ Alone 494 Replies latest social current
I guess what I find most sad about unbelievers is that God hasn't showed Himself to them in their lives.
Oh boo hoo
You're so privileged that He has considered you deserving of His attention and it's sad that the rest of us can't be like you. How very condescending of you...
And it's funny how the arm chair atheist scholars here have OVERWHELMING evidence for disavowing the gospels. Yet, many experts still hold to their validity.
Amazing.
Experts do validate that the people involved in writing the gospels never met Jesus. That his story was written decades after he supposely existed.
The Illiad has validity, but I really doubt the Kraken existed.
It's an insult to my father to call god by that same title. If he exists, he has shown himself to be completely useless.
To borrow from Dawkins: "If he existed and chose to reveal it, God himself could clinch the argument, noisily and unequivocally, in his favor."
So, save the condescending bullshit.
You're so privileged that He has considered you deserving of His attention and it's sad that the rest of us can't be like you.
Not the rest of you. Just the ones that are unwilling to look. The ones that think they know more than "God" knows. It's just sad. Not condescending. Just feel pity. I didn't earn or deserve anything.
If he existed and chose to reveal it, God himself could clinch the argument, noisily and unequivocally, in his favor."
He has revealed it. If you haven't seen it. I'm sorry. Again, not condescending. More like it's pitifully sad.
:-)
It's fun getting the atheists angry.
And it's funny how the arm chair atheist scholars here have OVERWHELMING evidence for disavowing the gospels. Yet, many experts still hold to their validity. Amazing.
What does disavowing the gospels mean? Scholars all agree they are "valid" ancient documents (not modern forgeries).
If you are talking about taking a critical approach towards reliability, how is that any different in principle from taking a critical approach towards the GJW's authenticity? Taking the gospels on faith as inerrant would be like taking the papyrus fragment on faith as completely genuine (and dismissing the contrary findings against authenticity as simply due to a bias against its validity).
No one is angry. We are just sad that we live in a world full of delusional people.
Christ Alone - how do you know this fragment is a fake? Did God tell you it was?
Extending that - how do you know the other NT ancient texts are NOT fakes? Did God tell you they were not?
It's funny stuff. You're sad that I'm delusional. I'm sad that you're delusional.
What it comes down to is this:
Science and archeology, and even the Bible can be challenged. But when it comes down to it, personal experiences can't. If you haven't experienced God, that's fine. But I have, and it's proven that he exists. You can try to challenge me and my experiences, but the fact is that you haven't experienced it. You don't know what I went through. And seeing someone that is so full of themeselves and their own opinions that it pushes God away...that makes me sad.
Weird idea to say a god can be pushed around or away.
