Christianity has proof

Thank you for that opening, Jesusfreak22.What is Christianity?Before we can have a debate over whether Christianity has proof, we first ought to have some inkling of what we mean by "Christianity." That will tell us what actually needs to be proved.Now, I don't expect Pro to try to prove that every doctrine of Christianity is true. After all, Christians differ with each other over what doctrines are true. But think that at a minimum, before Christianity can be true, the following things must be true:1. There is a God.2. Jesus is the Christ.3. Jesus died for sins.4. Jesus was raised from the dead.Now, of course, Jesus couldn't have died for sins if there were no such thing as sin, and there couldn't be any such thing as sin unless there's a moral law that God imposes on us. So you might place morality in the fifth spot, but I think to be as fair as possible, we can just say that if Pro proves #3, she will have proven that there's a moral law.Pro's case for ChristianitySo far, all she's done is attempt to prove #1. But that is not sufficient to prove Christianity because it's possible for #1 to be true and yet for Christianity to be false. For example, it could be that Islam is true. Or it could be that deism is true. So Pro has not carried her burden of proof. Even if her arguments for God are sound, she has not shown that Christianity is true. She needs, at the very least, to prove that Jesus is the Christ.As for Pro's attempt to prove the existence of God, her argument is an exercise in credulity. Apparently, she can't imagine how the universe with all its intricacies could emerge from a big bang, so she concludes that God did it. But I think when it comes to subjects like the origin of the universe or the intricacies in the universe that we just don't know what happened. Reality is a strange enough place that we shouldn't jump to conclusions that stem from our own lack of imagination or lack of information. Maybe God did design and create the universe, but Pro hasn't really shown that.As far as Fred Hoyle's 1e40,000 odds of life spontaneously arising, I question whether Fred Hoyle really had enough information to calculate the odds. If Pro would explain to us how Mr. Hoyle came up with that number, perhaps we'd have something to argue about.We also have to consider our explanatory resources. There are roughly 1e23 stars in the universe[1], many of which have multiple planets, and many of which are big enough that "chances for life" could be taking place in multiple locations at once. That's not to mention the many moons around many of the planets which provide more chances for life. If you add to that the 13.82 billion years[2] the universe has had to try various chemical combinations over and over again, we might be able to overcome Fred Hoyle's improbability.The case against ChristianityChristianity is a self-refuting religion. By "self-refuting," I mean that if you begin with the assumption that it is true, you end up with the conclusion that it is false. Christianity contains certain doctrines that if true turn out to disprove Christainity. My argument can be summarized like so:1. If Christianity is true, then Judaism is true.2. If Judaism is true, then Christianity is false.3. Therefore, if Christianity is true, then Christianity is false.Let's take the premises one at a time.1. If Christianity is true, then Judaism is true.Christianity presupposes the truth of Judaism. Jesus was a Jew. He believed God gave his law to Moses and that it was binding on the Jewish people. Jesus believed in the God of Israel. Jesus was supposedly the fulfilment of Jewish prophecies found in the Tanakh. So if Christianity is true, then Judaism is true.2. If Judaism is true, then Christianity is false.According to Christianity, Jesus "does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself" (Hebrews 7:27). Jesus' death completely did away with any further need for sacrifices. He was the final sacrifice that accomplished what previous sacrifices could not.However, according to Judaism, sacrifices will never end. Although Jews don't sacrifice today because there is no Temple in which to do so, the prophets say sacrifices will be restored. In Malachi 3, it says that when he comes, the "messenger of the covenant" will purify the Levites so that they can "bring offerings in righteousness" (Malachi 3:1-4). In Zechariah 14, it talks about how God is going to punish all the nations that fought against Jerusalem, and in verse 21, it says, "Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the Lord Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them." In Isaiah 56:7, it says that at the time when the house of the Lord is called a house of prayer for all nations that "their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my alter." There are also other passages in Ezekiel about sacrifices in the new age, but I think I've said enough to establish the point.If sacrifices continue into the eschaton, as the prophets say, then it cannot be true that Jesus was the final sacrifice, so Christianity is not true.NOTES1. http://www.esa.int...2. http://www.washingtonpost.com...