Christianity is the Right Religion Part 1

The Bible is not just a book of great moral lessonsI think my slavery point proves that wrong. It is supposed to be the word of God and it condones slavery as if it is a morally good. It is not if it isn't clear that slavery is a bad thing. living Word of God Judaism and Islam can say that so either I believe you all or you are all wrong. Bad argument. It is infallibleSlavery is a mistake therefore The Bible is wrong. indestructibleIt is a book that can burn not made of diamond. Jesus affirms the infallibility of the BibleUsing Jesus as if that proves the Bible to be the word of God. The Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35). Likewise Isaiah exclaims, "The Word of God stands forever, " adding that"my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not be empty, But will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it" (Isaiah 40:8, 55:1). Paul describes Scripture as "the oracles of God" (Romans 3:2). Circual logic. My argument was clear that circular logic cannot be used since I have to accept the Bible is the word of God or the Christian God is true which I haven't therefore circual logic does not work. anti-Christian emperors to godless CommunistStill does not prove to be the word the God. If it was attacked by Jew's would it not be the word of God? No therefore this is also not an argument. I highly doubt there were Godless. Christians who wouldn't forswear it have been persecuted and martyred throughout the ages. A lot of people have been persecuted so I don't see how this is a point. You have made an argument for other religions to be true if you only require to be persecuted or martyed. Roman emperor Diocletian outlawed the Bible and decreed that any Christian caught with one would be executed. If Islam was the main religion there then you would be giving an argument for Islam. This is also not an argument since emperors want control and want to stop anything stopping their control of an area. Maximian issued an edict that all Christian churches were to be destroyed and all copies of the Bible were to be burned. I am guessing it is not indestructible then. And as a result was tried, Sentenced, And executed within days. This martyrdom continued into the modern era, With particularly severe punishments meted out for Bible possession throughout much of the Islamic world. Still not an argument for Bible being the word of God. Being a martyr does not make what you died for true. The Baptist Ioan Clipa was repeatedly arrested by the secret police for distributing Bibles. He suffered a nervous breakdown and eventually committed suicide. Or maybe he realised why would God punish me for distributing books and then had a thought maybe God does not love us and his life was ruined which he eventually committed suicide. My theory holds as much weight as your since both of ours are theories. Still not an argument for Bible being the word of God. "Pile them, If you will, On the left side of your study table; but place your own Holy Bible on the right side-all by itself, All alone-and with a wide gap between them. For. . . There is a gulf between it and the so called sacred books of the East which serves the one from the other utterly, Hopelessly and forever. . . A veritable gulf which cannot be bridged over by any science of religious thought. "Still not a point. As archaeological finds have verified names, Places, And events described in the Bible and as its prophecies have been fulfilledProof? I can say the sun will rise the next day. I predicted the sun rising am I the word of God now? That is your logic. They reject the Bible's account of miracles not because the eyewitness accounts are unreliableThose are the reasons. But because they believe miracles are impossibleOutstanding claims require outstanding evidence. Science questions not assume they are right. The evidence of these miracles are bad. But you'll have a lot of explaining to do. No you would have to explain why you believe this to be the word of God. Prophecies, Testimonies and belief is what you boil it down to. I am simply saying there is not enough right evidence for it to be the case. Evidence are basically facts. It is not a fact the Bible is the word of God therefore the burden is on you to prove it to be the case. I boiled the best of your arguments and I would say they are insufficient evidence. People have long believed in the divine inspiration and authority of the BibleArgumentum ad populum. Not an argument. The Bible maintains a unified, Continuous message across its sixty-six booksYou say it as though I know what you talking about this continuous message on the off chance I do not know what the message is you have not told me what that is later on. A claim with no evidence or explanation. If you read it enough you can't help but notice it has the same voice of authority throughout. I hear a voice of authority when reading a book. That does mean it is the word of God? No therefore this is also not an argument. I'm not saying each book has a similar style or that the authorial "voice" of each biblical writer is identicalSame voice is another way of saying it is identical. There is a distinct voice behind the voice. You are reading a book not being told it by someone therefore the voice in your head is a voice in your head. Nothing more nothing less. In my own reading of the BibleEverything in this paragraph is subjective therefore it can be used to show whether or not the Bible is the word of God. Apart from the quote which still does not state Christianity to be the right religion. It would be nearly impossible to pull off. No it wasn't because Islam and Judaism have been along for that time so it isn't a point. divine conspiracyOkay I require evidence since I don't believe this conspiracy to be true. Dr. Walter ElwellYou have used many arguments from authority. I didn't do that because I kept to the arguments instead of believing a person to be right. It is more important about the ideas someone has then who said it. The Bible is a unique phenomenonIslam and Judaism and examples to show it is not that unique. What a dreadful muddle it would all be if there was no central controlling influenceThat is what he thinks. You do not require God to go the toilet, Eat, Sleep, Talk and many other things so why does it have to be a God at the beginning of universe? Since you cannot give me evidence for the Bible being the word of God. I don't have more room to write more about why the Bible is the Word of God, But I will address it more in the next round. Please don't. Most of what was filler and I boiled you arguments down in an above rebuttal. There were 3 and even they were not evidence for the Bible being the word of God so I don't see how carrying writing paragraphs when the arguments you have made were insufficient in stating the Bible being the word of God. Just because you don't like how God views homosexuality is your problem not His. Oh, So when I see religious folk looking down on people for being born differently I should let it slide. Gay is not a choice therefore assuming your God to be true has allowed them to exist even though God forbids them to be gay. How is that fair? It is not therefore God is not just for creating people different and not allowing them to express it without religious folk having an issue with it. This should prove your God to be wrong. What does It have against homosexuals? Is adultery/polygamy "natural"? What? You are equating an immoral act with sex with two of the same sex. There is a difference. One is against a marriage bond and another is two consenting adults engaging in sexual intercourse. Not an argument. Or for that matter, Is murder natural? Is theft natural? All these behaviors are common among animals, And so in some sense, Are "natural. "No one is born a thief or murderer. What you like in a partner is affected by the genes you were given. Meaning homosexuals are natural since they were born that way. Humans dwell in natural bodies that are predisposed to sin because of the Curse. So many people could attempt to justify sin by claiming that it"s "only natural. " Assume this is true still does not give an argument for why homosexuality is a bad thing. Why not be cannibalistic? Praying mantises are, After all! Even ignoring the animal kingdom and focusing on humans, We see that humans are prone to many behaviors-murder, Praying mantis if I assume your God to be true created them as when the male has done its part creating offspring the female eats the male. Sorry but if God was real you would say God created them this way. I would say it is evolution. They either lack the food to live without consuming partner or another reason which I cannot think of. So simply showing a behavior to be natural is not the same as showing it to be right. Being gay is not a behavior. So you are saying being straight is also a behavior. Try being gay and tell me how that works out for you. If all nature is randomEvolution not random. But if humans were created in the image of God, Separate from animalsGuessing my assumption is true assuming your God exists for some reason only really cares about us. Why? Maybe it is because we are the most developed. How is that fair since other animals we not given the same time and chances to be as developed? God cannot answer since God is discriminating base of species and does not care about male praying mantis as if they can develop reason to go against God. From what I read you did not sufficiently prove me wrong. I found your statements appeal to many fallacies and others do not logically follow. Being gay is not a behaviour. If it is then straights can choose to be gay but they don't want to. Which is not true and you have not given reasons for homosexuality to be wrong since you moved away from it and talked about what is natural which even then still you did not make a valid point.