The Jesus Myth Debate

(I am going to refer to you directly now, since you seem to prefer that style of debate.) Just to clarify- You may not believe in supernatural events. That is your right. But simply telling me that you do not believe in them doesn't make your opinion true. Just like me stating that I believe in God doesn't make mine true. I encourage you to show WHY you believe what you do, and HOW your beliefs can be possible. I am trying my best to do so, myself. Moving on to my responses. 1. Our differences do indeed make us interesting and wonderful. That's a true statement. But in order to accept the idea of Hell we must see that the Biblical God is, in fact, omniscient. What this means is that God knows each and every one of us, and the decisions we will make. He knows if we will accept Him, or if we've already set ourselves on a path in which we will never turn to Him. If we've gone past that point of no return, God may choose to take our lives. Why? Because they are His in the first place. He gives us life on this earth for that ONE choice. But you may ask why He doesn't just give us eternity to make the choice? God made us as eternal beings, then allowed us to choose if we will worship Him. If we deny Him, He literally CAN'T be around us. The only place without God, is Hell, the place He designed not for us, but for Satan. Satan, knowing we were God's most treasured friends, is trying to convince us to choose self-destruction, a.k.a Hell. This is how Hell and the biblical God can exist together. Yes, when a watch goes wrong, we blame the watchmaker, but we are not watches. We are beings. We can choose whether or not we go to Hell or Heaven. God isn't telling you where to go. And He didn't create us to be broken. 2. But where did morality come from? You haven't answered my question. You implied that it's instinct. Where did instinct come from? We have been imprinted with the idea of God and morality. We KNOW that taking a life is wrong. I think this doesn't prove we don't need God, rather that God is the source. We would have no reason for morality, if it weren't for God. You say it's nature. But at the same time, you say that sin, also an animal urge, is just nature. Animals aren't born with conflicting natures. Humans are. The Bible states that we have been made in God's image, yet we have been infected with a sinful nature. It's a bit strange to believe that humans, who invented morality for the sake of self-preservation, would end up killing each other over it... It just doesn't add up. Can you explain to me how these contradictions sort themselves out? 3. Actually, God invented the sacrifice directly in the Bible. Not only did He instruct Noah on how to sacrifice animals, to solidify a covenant with God (mending the relationship), but He also had Cain and Abel actually burn their produce in thanks to Him. Sacrifices were never about God allowing crops to grow. They were about mending a relationship that was constantly being broken. You are trying to say that the sacrifices performed (for very explicit reasons in the Bible) were not really performed for those reasons... but I don't see any cause to support this. I understand that this is your opinion. You're entitled to it. But you are not right because you stated your opinion. There is written record of these sacrifices and why they were performed. Addressing the matter of Jesus' resurrection, as I stated earlier, there is no proof it didn't happen. There were eyewitnesses, including women (who never would've been mentioned for credibility in a scam at that time), that have had their testimony recorded int eh scripture. The scripture has yet to be proven false. So, according to scientific theory, it can be assumed true until proven false. In fact, it's actually MORE probable to believe in the resurrection than to believe it was a scam, just by the method of Occam's razor. We have less to put faith in (we must merely believe Jesus was who He said He was) to make sense of the resurrection from a biblical view, then we'd have to put faith in (we must assume that the disciples somehow overpowered ROMAN guard, moved a giant tombstone, stole the body, made it appear to the people as alive, and got away with it for 2000 years) to believe that the Bible is false. I would also like to point out that the idea of the afterlife was around long before "books" and "churches", just to clarify. As for other resurrection stories, Satan of the Bible is constantly trying to counterfeit God's miracles. It fits with his nature. Also, the fact that there are other resurrection stories doesn't disprove the Bible, sorry. I agree that it's improbable that all of them are true, but logically that doesn't prove any individual one false. Also, despite the open animosity the government, the Sanhedrin, and even some of the people, harbored toward Jesus, no one could ever prove His resurrection false. On the contrary, evidence has been found that the guards were in fact bribed to LIE and say that the body was taken. You can't debate this subject unless you accept that the God of the Bible is who He says He is. If you're to assume that God isn't holy and perfectly just, (as the Bible says) then you can't argue things contradicting each other in the context of the Bible. Your original claim was that you didn't understand the reasoning behind Hell, morality, sacrifices, sin, and Christianity as a whole. I am showing you the reasoning, but keep in mind it is still a faith. Just like ANYTHING in this world, you can always be skeptical. It doesn't make it false. 4. No. Staying pure until marriage isn't a guarantee against all STDs, but it is the safest option. God never intended us to even have disease in the first place. It's our sinful and human nature that causes us to be broken. God gave us this guideline to prevent disease, though. You have also given me a lot of your opinion on matters such as guilt, or sin. But where would it have come from? Do animals have guilt? No. Because they do not have it in their nature to destroy themselves. We do. Guilt, in a way, IS a self-defense mechanism. But we only need it because of sin. Sin tries to destroy us from the inside, God gave us guilt so that we can recognize it. We are separated from other creatures in this fashion. We, as humans, are the only ones who have a desire to destroy ourselves. No animals have two natures, we do, because we have both a Godly father, and a father here on earth. As great as your father is, (I'm quite fond of mine) I'm sure you've figured out by now that he's not perfect, just like you and I. We would never have had the idea of morality if it wasn't for God. In fact, if we were animals, and the theory of natural selection was true, we would be extinct already. 5. As for your last argument, I suggest you do some more research. Archaeological digs have found quite a few pieces of evidence speaking of a "Jesus" who did miracles and claimed to be the Son of God. And as for human nature, why would we want to worship a God by nature if there wasn't one? You can be skeptical all you like, but it doesn't count for fact when you say "I doubt...etc.". Also, I will finish this response with one last thought, where did we come from? What's our purpose? Don't you take it on faith that there's some "unexplained reason" we're here? So why don't you exercise that same faith in God? Recap: 1. God didn't create us to be broken. We did it to ourselves. He's also omniscient, and knows our hearts (or if we will eventually accept Him) 2. Your opinion that Hell is a trash bin for God's "mistakes" is conjecture and nothing else. Morality couldn't have "just started" and conflicts with sin, which you also claim as nature. 3. According to the Bible we are debating over, sacrifices were about redemption. Multiple resurrection stories don't disprove the Bible. 4. Sin isn't animal. It destroys us, which is contrary to animals. 5. Archaeological evidence supports Jesus.