I Need Help

[Teardrop]

k I hope this is the right forum for it. I need very good debaters for Christianity as many as possible... so u can register on this forum and post on this thread : [url removed] and the rest of the threads here : [url removed](just paste that on yr browser and it gets u to those site threads immediately.)

As u can read on those threads we (the few Christians there) r up against very hard core and tough to defeat non-Christians who r very good debaters.

Pls help us to argue against them and help spread God's Word in that forum pls... it has many unsaved members some 10810+ unsaved ppl whom we can all reach out to.
Pls help. Let me know if u need any help to register and post there.

To register is easy click on Forum Index on Forum and then click register and u can register in 4mins and start posting immediately.

ty all and God bless,
Teardrop

Edit: Moderator Edit: This is not the space for such requests. This is a web design forum, not a place to ask for help converting others.

[boxxertrumps]

What makes you think any of us are christians?

Also, Link.

[djr33]

Well, some of us are.

But that's entirely irrelevant.

It doesn't make any difference what my beliefs are. I don't think that every time I disagree with someone in a small or vast way it's my job to run around and convince others that they're wrong. Personally, I don't believe in God. Yet I don't have a problem with those who do. I'm not gay. But how does it hurt me if someone else is?

Anyway, enjoy your beliefs, but stop acting pompous and stupid by claiming you have some divine need to intervene on the behalves of us less fortunate folks.

What if you're wrong? Should I spend as much time convincing you that there is no God? What if that's the only true way you can be saved? What if Judaism is the right path? Must people convince you of that? What about Islam? Buddhism? Some small tribal religion?

If there is only one God, which one, and, really, why is it your God that must be spread around?

It's funny, y'know, that you call yourself Christian. Almost laughable. So, which Christian God do you believe in? The one that allows homosexuality? The one that sends souls to hell for being gay? The one that thinks all "inferior races" should be exterminated or enslaved?

Get enough people together, and the majority will certainly believe in some unknown force that is part of the meaning of life, that is to say some form of God. But will any majority agree on what that force is? No. Will even the majority of Christians agree on any real "rules" about being a "good Christian"? No.
So why ask for Christians. I think you first need to explain your moral judgment on every single possible issue, how you interpret every word of the bible, then maybe just then you should ask for help from those who agree.

And, just once, I'd love to see some actual arguments between religious groups that might start to explain to me exactly which God makes any sense. 'Cause, sure, I hear a lot that there is a God. Let's say it even convinced me to believe that. But which one? Everyone has an opinion, but none are any better than another.
So, by that logic, let's say I'm convinced-- there is a God. Ok, which one? And, better yet, is it even the god in the bible? A god any mortal has envisioned? One that can be understood to any degree to which it's even worth knowing of or considering, from our limited viewpoint?

And, yes, I have yet to disprove your God. That's true. But, why is your interpretation of the bible, even if the bible is right, so absolute?

[james438]

hehe, cool response djr33. The funny thing is that I am an very conservative Christian and there is almost nothing that I disagree with in your reply. Course if it were me I very well may have just deleted Teardrop's post as nothing more than spam.

I really don't think that this is the place for making such requests, but really, what made this guy think that this was a good forum to make such a request? Maybe it is because he thinks that programmers generally need to think very logically? Dunno.

Two things I have noticed though. I have a very keen interest in not going to hell and to that end I will be very careful about what I believe so as not to believe the wrong thing by mistake and end up in hell. That all depends on whether you believe in hell or not, but I'd rather not take a chance on the idea that there is no hell, but that's just me. Well, maybe not. I recently heard someone else say the same thing.

Going by what you said earlier djr33 I would take it a step further and say the majority of 'Christians' believe the wrong thing and if any of several different variations of Christianity are correct then the vast majority of 'Christians' are not Christian at all and are most likely hell bound. I figure most Christians who are not into Christianity as some sort of fad or because their parents went to Church or something like that will try to dig deeper and figure out what is true and what is not even if it is a monumental task and there is a lot of garbage to sort through and there is. I am willing to dig through all the mire because for me the stakes were/are just too high.

[djr33]

I'm glad you found the post interesting. After a couple discussions recently about religion in general, I'm becoming very curious about this topic, of why one religion, or why another. I'd love to hear a debate between two people who ARE religious and do believe in God, about some small aspect, rather than the endless debate, "is there a God?". Some simple examples: 1. Is Jesus as significant as some believe? 2. Is homosexuality wrong (consider that some churches have now changed)? 3. Can another religion also be correct, if you are a good enough person? (In other words, does being a kind, humble and helpful Muslim mean you can't go to heaven, or would that be just as good as being the same, as a Christian?)

The links themselves were spam. I thought it a bit more productive to discuss why it was removed, rather than just removing the post entirely. It certainly has no real place on the forum, though.

I have a very keen interest in not going to hell and to that end I will be very careful about what I believe so as not to believe the wrong thing by mistake and end up in hell.

Justified. But how does one know what actions will lead to heaven or hell, and how does one find the only correct path (there can only be one, as religions in general inherently exclude other religions from being right)?

That all depends on whether you believe in hell or not, but I'd rather not take a chance on the idea that there is no hell, but that's just me.

Pascal's wager. Famed athiest, decided to find religion in the end because he thought it made more sense to believe and go to heaven because:
If God is real, and you believe: Go to heaven
If God is not real, and you believe: no harm
If God is real and you don't not believe: Hell
If God is not real and you don't believe: nothing

Therefore, he claimed it made more sense to believe than not believe.

However, that discounts the simple fact that life, that is to say the time life gives, is an asset. If there is no afterlife, and you waste even a moment of life pretending there is, that's irreplaceable and harming. If you wasted your life, then, that would be the inverse to going to hell after life. Or, if you feel strongly there is an afterlife, the question then becomes even more complex, as I said before, which path to follow. If you follow a path, the odds are that it is the wrong path (in simple numbers) as there are many other paths which claim to lead to a good afterlife. It's a gamble. So, in some sense, the only safe thing to do is to make the most of life, the only thing you're certain of. Or, take the risk, pick one of infinite "good" paths, and follow it. If you're right, it's like winning the lottery. If not, it's like losing the lottery, after spending all your money on it.

I figure most Christians [...] will try to dig deeper

Great. If that's the case, then I think their beliefs are well-founded. Followers, on the other hand, annoy me.

[james438]

I can answer all of those questions, but it is important to set up some ground rules: I am basing my answers on the Bible and what it has to say on any given topic. For the Bible I am using logic as my standard in so far as logic can be used. For example if there are certain areas where the Bible contradicts itself then the whole thing is useless. Then again the Bible makes certain claims that can not be verified such as the nature of Hell since no one can see it or report back from having visited there.

Next, what would be your reasons for wanting to hear more about it? Is it because you are interested for academic reasons or because would really like to know the answer? For example are you interested because you enjoy learning and/or also enjoy intelligent discussions? or are you also interested because you want to know whether to accept one religious viewpoint as valid and follow it?

Last, and I am no sure how this last part plays into it, but I am sure it does, I believe that I am a Christian not out of choice. I believe that I was called to be a Christian through the working of the Holy Spirit and as such I am incapable of not believing in God or Jesus or turning away from Christianity. In other words even though I do not believe in free will I believe we are given the illusion of free will in that we are unable to see the future and God has created all of human history: past, present, and future. So all decisions have been determined before hand, but we must still bear the consequences for our actions.

Unlike most people I did not come from a Christian family. I also did not choose to be a Christian because my life was going poorly and I wanted to seek God as a means of rescuing me from the troubles I was in or for a troubled conscience. As I remember life was going pretty well for me at the time. I felt I did not have a choice in the matter and it was after I became a Christian that my life became much more difficult as many sins in my life had to be rooted out. If it were up to me I don't think I would have become a Christian at all, but it wasn't up to me and so here I am.

I wasn't sure if you were saying that you want to hear more from two intelligent people about some small aspect or more from me If the former you have a bit of a difficult task ahead of you since the realm of Christianity is indeed a largely tangled mess. You have to know really well what you are looking for in a person and know what standards you want to hold for each. Does each believe the entire Bible to be authoritative in their discussion? If so what understandings do they have on various fundamental issues? Do they believe in just the Bible as authoritative to the discussion or is there more to it? etc. It is a bit frustrating when you realize all you have to sort through, but then so is getting a degree from a college or university. We do it anyway.

From what you said on Pascal's wager I would have to agree with your philosophy more than Pascal's. Even the bible agrees:

1 Corinthians 15:13-19 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty.
Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up--if in fact the dead do not rise. For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

In other words they may as well have enjoyed the pleasures of life to the fullest and not denied themselves anything.

Yeah, a bit of a longer response and even then I have not really answered any of your questions, but I am not sure that you have specifically asked me any of those questions and I'd rather not volunteer too much, if anything at all, if you are not asking me. All I did was set up some ground rules for if you did want to discuss it any.

Later,
James438

[BLiZZaRD]

I can answer all of those questions,....... Yeah, a bit of a longer response and even then I have not really answered any of your questions

As is the way of most religious groups.

For the Bible I am using logic as my standard in so far as logic can be used.

That's a contradiction in itself.

For example if there are certain areas where the Bible contradicts itself then the whole thing is useless. Then again the Bible makes certain claims that can not be verified such as the nature of Hell since no one can see it or report back from having visited there.

Any good religious person will tweak that book to meet his point. To take a quote from a good man:

Of the various methods I've seen to "explain" these:
1. "That is to be taken metaphorically" In other words, what is written is not what is meant. I find this entertaining, especially for those who decide what ISN'T to be taken as other than the absolute WORD OF GOD--which just happens to agree with the particular thing they happen to want...

2. "There was more there than...." This is used when one verse says "there was a" and another says "there was b," so they decide there was "a" AND "b"--which is said nowhere. This makes them happy, since it doesn't say there WASN'T "a+b." But it doesn't say there was "a+b+little green martians." This is often the same crowd that insists theirs is the ONLY possible interpretation (i.e. only "a") and the only way. I find it entertaining they they don't mind adding to verses.

3. "It has to be understood in context" I find this amusing because it comes from the same crowd that likes to push likewise extracted verses that support their particular view. Often it is just one of the verses in the contradictory set is suppose to be taken as THE TRUTH when if you add more to it it suddenly becomes "out of context." How many of you have gotten JUST John 3:16 (taken out of all context) thrown up at you?

4. "there was just a copying/writing error" This is sometimes called a "transcription error," as in where one number was meant and an incorrect one was copied down. Or that what was "quoted" wasn't really what was said, but just what the author thought was said when he thought it was said. And that's right--I'm not disagreeing with events, I'm disagreeing with what is WRITTEN. Which is apparently agreed that it is incorrect. This is an amusing misdirection to the problem that the bible itself is wrong.

5. "That is a miracle." Naturally. That is why it is stated as fact.

6. "God works in mysterious ways" A useful dodge when the speaker doesn't understand the conflict between what the bible SAYS and what they WISH it said.