Johnny Skeptic

Based upon what evidence? Why can’t God be evil and the Devil be good?

That is what the Bible writers said, but how do know that what they said is true? That is the problem when a God speaks through human proxies instead of speaking directly to people himself.

That is ridiculous. All skeptics favor human oversight. They know that without human oversight their would be anarchy. Skeptics would not object to divine oversight either if it were reasonable.

Are you saying that “the Bible says so� is all of the evidence that you need?

Some skeptics have the same advantages. Are you saying that the Bubonic plague, the recent tsunami in Asia and Hurricane Katrina are tangible benefits? The fact that tangible benefits are often not distributed to those in greatest need is good evidence that the God of the Bible does not exist. If life happened by chance, what would we expect to find regarding the distribution of tangible benefits? The correct answer is, exactly what we see in the world today. Good things and bad things happen to people no matter what their world views are. Some skeptics have much better health and much better education and jobs than most Christians do. Surely you will agree that luck determines who wins lotteries. Why can’t all of life be a lottery?

Why people don’t care about what? There is no evidence that God ever helped anybody. Regarding miracle healings, today, millions of Christians disagree as to what constitutes a miracle healing. There are not any good reasons at all for anyone to believe that it was any different back then.

Regarding the feeding of the 5,000, which is mentioned in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, Christians have some problems. Consider the following:

1 - The texts claim that the disciples were aware of the miracle, but no mention is made that the crowd was aware of the miracle.

2 - The anonymous Gospel writers did not claim that they personally witnessed the miracle.

3 - The Gospel writers did not reveal their source(s), which might very well have been third hand or fourth hand.

4 - There is no evidence when the claim was first made.

5 - There is no evidence that the claim was widely accepted.

Some Christians claim that skeptics are predisposed against miracles, but I don't know of any skeptic who would object to anyone, a claimed God or an alien, being available to help us with our many burdens

Acts 14:3 says "Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands." In order to make my point more clear, the New International Version translates the verse as "So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders."

It is a fact that there is much more need today of tangible confirmations of "the message of his grace" that can be reasonably attributed to God than there was in the 1st century with a supposed veritable plethora of eyewitnesses being available to offer first hand accounts of miracles, including the resurrection of Jesus.

Regarding the claims of 1) the feeding of the 5,000, 2) the feeding of the 4,000, 3) the numerous healings performed by Jesus, 4) the 3,000 people who became Christians after hearing teachings by Peter, 4) Matthew 4:24, which says "And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them," 5) 1st Corinthians 15:6, which says "After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep," and 6) the coming of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:4, if the claims were true there would have been no need for confirming "the message of his grace" with tangible signs and wonders.

It is important to note that the texts say that "both sides" were aware that Jesus had supernatural powers. Matthew 12:24 says "But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, 'It is only by Beelzebub, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons.'" Today, both sides "are not" aware of God's supernatural power. Therefore, we don't have nearly the "evidence" today that people with "varying" world views supposedly had back then.

There is no logical correlation that can be made between the ability to rise from the dead and goodness. If Jesus actually did rise from the dead, all that that proved was that he had the ability to rise from the dead, nothing more. If Elvis Presley rose from the dead and said that he died for the sins of mankind, would you worship him based solely upon that evidence? Of course you wouldn’t.

jemand

Um.... I kinda define God as being good and the Devil being evil, so I really don't understand how God could be evil and the devil be good, because I'd still call the good one God and the evil one the Devil, and they don't switch back and forth, because completely evil or good beings wouldn't switch like that.

And as for "everyone" knowing lack of oversight leads to anarchy, how do they figure this out? Only by experience. If there weren't any bad experiences, people wouldn't know what anarchy would do.

I think I've said before that what the Bible says is good enough for me. I've said before that you can't prove stuff like the existence of God, you have to just assume it, or believe it by faith (same thing, really.)

I don't know why, but it seems like God prefers working through people. God's people are the ones who are supposed to be helping other people, but too many are apathetic. God also for some reason does not want to remove all doubt to his existence.

Johnny Skeptic

My point is that there is no evidence at all that the God of the Bible is good in tangible ways today, or that he ever was good in tangible ways. There is no evidence at all that Jesus ever healed anybody, or that he fed 5,000 people with a few loaves of bread and a few fish. Please go back and reread my previous post where I showed that the evidence that we have today that God is good in tangible ways is not nearly what it supposedly was during the time of Jesus and the disciples. Jesus and the disciples provided tangible evidence of God's power. If faith is really all that belief is about, then why did Jesus need to tell a group of hardline skeptics that if they wouldn't believe upon his words, to believe upon the miracles that he performed, and why did the disciples need to go about confirming "the message of his grace" by performing tangible signs and wonders, and why did Jesus need to appear to anybody after he rose from the dead?

My point is that skeptics do not object to human or divine oversight as long as it is just in their opinions. You have the very same opinion yourself regarding human oversight. You approve of it, but only within certain parameters. The Bubonic Plague, the recent tsunami in Asia, and Hurricane Katriana, are not good examples of a God who cares about humanity. Allowing such things are not neccesary in order for a loving God to carry out his purposes. If you quote where Isaiah said that God's thoughts and ways are different from our own thoughts and ways, I will tell you that the only way that Isaiah could have known that would have been if he had shared God's thoughts and ways so that he could have made a proper comparison. If God does not wish to explain himself more fully, he should at the very least show up in person and tell everyone on earth to be patient, and that all will be revealed in due time. Hearsay evidence is bad enough in court trials, but human proxies speaking for God is a preposterous notion. Rational minded people will simply not trust human proxies who presume to speak for God, no matter what the religion.

The followers of other religions, and Deists as well, make the same faith based arguments that you do. What makes your faith any more believable?

Same as before.

Yes, people who had tangible powers, meaning Jesus and the disciples. Would you care to state a case for Christianity without making any mention of tangible powers?

Many non-Christians are very helpful people. In addition, other than Jesus, Moses, Abraham and Paul are probably the most important people in the Bible, and God contacted all of them directly, not through helpful people.

Proof beyond all doubt would be nice, but the proof that we already have has convinced only one fourth of the people in the world to become Christians. How do you account for this? Hundreds of millions of the followers of other religions who are aware of the Gospel message believe in intelligent design, miracles, love, kindness, divine oversight and a comfortable eternal life. What evidence have they missed?