NOGO

Jesus never mentioned once that he was there to reconcile humnity to God needed because of Adam's sin. Not once. Not even a hint.

He stated clearly that he was there for the children of Israel only.

Please re-read my post I have the feeling that you missed something.

seebs

Uh, no. I'm not "the True Christian". I'm *A* Christian. I'm probably wrong on a lot of things; everyone I've ever known has been wrong. I'm sure that the other poster (TC) is a Christian too. I just happen to disagree with her on a lot of stuff.

Saying that she's "not a true Christian" would be like saying that someone who doesn't agree with one of your less-tested theories is not a "real" scientist.

seebs

They certainly seem to be, because they're still repeating it at me, as though proof by repetitive assertion were a form of argument.

Kosh

All that's being repeated at you are questions
which you haven't answered yet....

Panta Pei

seebs:

You really are misrepresenting the posts you are responding to and missing the significant points that are glaring.

Please try to step back, re-read some of the other posts free from the 'melee' motivation that has overwhelmed your rationale.

If you are a true 'christian skeptic' and really cherish thought/logic you will do this for yourself.

Trust me, I realize that you will take even this advice as coming from 'the enemy', but I think you may be able to struggle past the urge to retaliate in favor of a more critical analysis of this thread.

Thanks for any effort you can give.

~ Steve

MOJO-JOJO

Oh THAT's not a problem for them alli. You see, the bible says that "all things are possible with God." If we can't make sense out of something we observe, as compared to what the bible says about that observation, then we are simply being deceived by the "devil" .

Stephen Maturin

That's all well and good, TC, but anyone can "proclaim." I'm equally unafraid to proclaim the falsity about your faith. So then, where have these competing proclamations gotten us? Nowhere, of course. Are you equally fearless about trying to establish the truth about your faith?

seebs

That's possible. My eyes glaze over when people wave reams of quotes at me. Generally, if the overall tone of a post seems hostile, I assume that the argument will be weak; good arguments don't generally come with hostile tones.

However, I will point out that, in general, I've been decidedly unimpressed with "challenges" to Christianity based on reading bits of the Bible; most of them are very weak once you take the time to understand them, and, after a while, it's like deciding whether or not to research a new "artifact found in a geode" or whatever as "proof" that radiometric dating doesn't work. At some point, I lose interest in checking out another dozen "proofs", especially when they're tossed around as "here's an argument I bet you've never seen". It's dull, after a while.

You may rest assured that I do read some of these things, but if I see an obvious misunderstanding, I toss the whole thing out; it's not gonna be worth the marginal effort to try to sift through it looking for an untainted argument.

seebs

I looked, I got bored, I didn't feel like wading through a repetition of an old argument. It turns out that my contract does not require me to give full and complete answers to every single question anyone asks me. I have no burden of proof here; I'm not trying to convince you. If you want to convince *me*, then the burden of proof is shifted to you, because you're the one demanding that I change my mind.

I have seen dozens of "challenges" pointed at members of all sorts of religion, members of no religion, and so on. So far, I haven't seen a single one that came within hailing distance of being a compelling argument. How much time should I spend trying to check your translations and interpretations, and re-reading the entire rest of the Bible in case you missed a relevant point, or simply omitted it because it didn't help your case?

My answer is "solidly under a minute", until I have some reason to believe that you've got arguments any better than Pat Robertson's. As of yet, I haven't seen you argue anything convincingly.

Toto

Hi seebs - I asked you a simple question which I did not think was hostile, but which you have ignored. I have no hostile intentions, I'm just trying to understand where you are coming from.

The question is, what other Christians do you think are authoritative? Who do you study with or learn from?

I ask because it looks like you are just ignoring the parts of the Bible or traditional Christianity that you don't like - for which I commend you - but it's not clear what Christianity means at that point.