[duffyd]

Therefore the Jews certainly understood that Jesus was claiming to be God. He was blaspheming all over the place and said He had to die for saying He was God. They got Pilate to kill Him by saying He was proclaiming to be a King and was ergo a threat to Roman rule. They got it alright, and perverted His message to commit cold blooded murder.

[duffyd]

At the same time, let's be clear about why most people refuse to develop a relationship with Him. They don't want to. Simple as that.
You, anyone, can pray to receive Christ as his/her Savior and He will come into you. Why won't people try Him out like that to see if He is real or not? Not for lack of evidence. HE can prove Who HE is to anyone willing to seek HIM right now, but you won't. Most won't.
Why? Why always insist on evidence when all they could ever hope for and more is right there inside Him and He is all yours when you pray with all your guts that He will come into your life? It makes no sense, does it?

[duffyd]

We are left inevitably with one conclusion, which I've stated before. They don't want anything to do with Him! It is that simple. Accusing Him and His followers of every kind of imaginary evil doesn't cut it. They even admitted He was a good guy; No doubt He was a real figure who walked the face of the earth. (Then, they run away when pressed to explain how they know those things! It is predictable to a scientific certainty.) 

Trying to paint Him and His disciples with a broad brush of perverse insults is guaranteed, as well. Serious debate is deliberately avoided through these kinds of distractions/manipulations. Again, why would they do such things? If they could argue against Him successfully, factually, using legitimate tools, you'd have to expect they would. Otherwise they waste gobs of time, tons of time. But, they refuse. (They really can't and they realize it.) In every way, particularly scientifically, His true identity surfaces especially upon the closest scrutiny.
They had a perfect set of opportunities to present their case and we got practically nothing. Frankly, I expected scientists would fare better, at least their efforts would be more laudable.
This only serves to strengthen our certainty in His reality. It proves how formidable He is as an historical figure and as the Risen Son of GOD.

[duffyd]

I had hoped to establish, scientifically, the facts we have. I mentioned a couple, but never developed even those thoroughly. I was asked many questions which I began to answer. I insisted that some of my questions should be answered as well, but was ignored. These debates don't have to devolve into trash talking. If the other side was capable of showing the kind of respect agreed to when they joined this website, we may have gotten further. Good humor is acceptable, I presume, especially on "Chat". But accusing someone of never being honest, even once, and referring to him as a pervert who drinks blood, etc., etc., while refusing to engage in serious debate based on fair give and take, is not conducting oneself in the spirit of the rules.

[duffyd]

I surely do understand some of the misgivings of the other side. I shared them and many more. But, I sense something else is going on. A smokescreen of sorts it seems is the purpose behind some objections. If GOD is depicted accurately in the Bible, He didn't shy away from hard truths. He's pretty bold in revealing Who He is and what He is about. It is worth a closer look.

[duffyd]

One can reasonably accept it for what it is, though not what Believers claim it to be, with the reservations that the NT, at least, was not written contemporaneously and the whole thing has been collated edited and translated to the point where it represents the interests and prejudices of its editors and translators as much as its original authors.

My favorite example is where the Hebrew version of Genesis states that all animals were created with a soul ("nefesh") but most Latin and English versions do not, in order to justify blood sports. Frankly, if you doubt the authenticity of Chapter One, it's not a good idea to base serious life choices on the rest of the book. So use the Talmud (because the scrolls are copied, not edited or translated) for guidance, and take the rest with a pinch of salt.

You need to work on bible translation and conduct word studies which are fascinating. You should see that your understanding of the verse you reference in Genesis is incorrect. 
In terms of historical standards the New Testament is very current and the textual variants add up to nothing that changes any of the basic tenets of the Bible.

Even though you refused to address my question, I will tell you that it didn't take 200 years for the N.T. to be written after His death. Way, way off.

[duffyd]

That is what is so cool about GOD. He can be known!

Wrong!
An angel fell from heaven with a broken wing. A couple of lads found him and took him to their local vet who fixed the wing and fed him on ambrosia for a few weeks, then called the lads back to say goodbye.
The angel said "You've all been very kind. What can I do to repay you?"
"Just tell us what God is like"
"Well, she's black....."

God has motherly qualities and if He's black, that's great. Hardy har har. Painting believers as racist, sexist fools is the domain of those who likely honor those very attributes.

[duffyd]

It's a ramshackle collection of historical fact swimming in myth and magic, with a few good ideas for survival in a desert (Leviticus) and an urban society (Mark). A sound basis for workers' rights ("six days shalt thou labor…"  "the laborer is worthy of his hire....") and some  general commandments that underpin most criminal and civil law. But it doesn't provide any excuse for tithes, pogroms, crusades,  inquisitions, self-flagellation, paedophilia, shunning, pilgrimage...… or any evidence for the supernatural or an afterlife, and the reification of the adjectives "good" and "evil" is an insult to the human intellect.

"...and some  general commandments that underpin most criminal and civil law..." Is that all? Thousands of years after they were written down, those commandments became the basis for  much of civil and criminal law today. That's more than a small matter. It's huge. Think about that. Obviously they knew what they were talking about or the Person Who gave them those laws surely did. Much of the rest of your paragraph is silly nonsense which is why you wrote it. 

[duffyd]

The Bible, as generally on sale in the UK, contains a whole raft of begats and begots,

The Jews kept very good records. They preserved their history on paper like no other people-group. They were and are God's Chosen people and they left clear historical recordings for posterity. No other group compares, particularly as one identified with God Himself.

[duffyd]

A fundamentalist rabbi crucified for annoying the Romans and the established clergy? Quite likely (we are an argumentative tribe). Virgin birth? It's not unique to the Judaeo-Christian mythology - indeed there have been 14  crucified saviour-gods born of virgins around the world - but it isn't believable either.

You don't know what he preached. How can you call Him a fundamentalist rabbi? How can you put any label on Him? You know practically nothing about the guy.

What difference would it make if there were 27 million other dudes supposedly born of a virgin? Would that mean that Christ wasn't? Would it diminish His status? There were numerous impossible events related to His birth, life and death. He emerged from the royal  line of David and was  a descendant of the Israelites through Abe, was He not, just as God promised?

The religious leaders were not in the business of having the Romans murder a fellow Jew who was innocent of all charges. Do you really think they disposed of Him simply because He was a pain in the ass? Think twice. Think about the huge crowds singing praises to Him. No one got a little jealous of the impoverished, uneducated, harmless, "nutty", preacher boy, or did they? What did they accuse Him of doing? Healing, miraculously, on holy days. Excuse me. If your child falls into a ditch on the Sabbath, what good mother/father leaves Him there? Remember Dave and the shewbread?
Jesus replied, "Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry?" They ate consecrated bread. The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So, they decided to kill Him. He got on their nerves? I guess, if you're blind.

[duffyd]

"eyewitness" accounts by people who weren't alive at the time.

Piece by piece, step by step, precept upon precept, we will take apart the conclusions you reached. Name an eyewitness who wasn't alive at the time to whom you refer. If you can't, and you can't, and don't answer, then we will throw out that silly accusation for good. We are well on our way to tossing a whole bunch of nonsense you promoted but couldn't support. You did get one thing right. He lived. You bet He did. You have exceeded Carrier's status.

[duffyd]

I'd be playing the piano in a whore house in The Big Easy, drinking port and stumbling to the john.

It's what I do for relaxation, but your god seems to have closed the whorehouses with COVID. Pity - they never had this much trouble with syphilis or any of His other creations. But you see I care about people, He doesn't.

You care about Him?

Rhetorical. This is fun

[Bored chemist]

Even though you refused to address my question, I will tell you that it didn't take 200 years for the N.T. to be written after His death. Way, way off.

indeed; 200 years is "way off" it was about 300 years before the NT, as we know it today, was written.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

[jeffreyH]

You don't know what he preached. How can you call Him a fundamentalist rabbi? How can you put any label on Him? You know practically nothing about the guy.

Wow a classic case of projection. Just couldn't let this one pass. Or do you have a time machine?

Let me rephrase that for you so you sound rational. "I don't know what he preached. How can I call Him a fundamentalist rabbi? How can I put any label on Him? I know practically nothing about the guy."

[duffyd]

You don't know what he preached. How can you call Him a fundamentalist rabbi? How can you put any label on Him? You know practically nothing about the guy.

Wow a classic case of projection. Just couldn't let this one pass. Or do you have a time machine?

Let me rephrase that for you so you sound rational. "I don't know what he preached. How can I call Him a fundamentalist rabbi? How can I put any label on Him? I know practically nothing about the guy."

If I got something wrong, by all means, prove it. You can't and won't, so your response is sort of silly.

[duffyd]

This is a sample of hard, productive work:

So your idea of your God is that it is a narcissistic sociopath. Much like Donald Trump then. Why not cut out the middle man and just worship the Donald. He is tangible. We have evidence that he exists. Everything he does is PERFECT!, WONDERFUL!

Ok, so now you have invented the ultimate intelligence out of thin air. Why? Was your argument crumbling? So if I have this right, god isn't all knowing, all powerful. God's just a servant of a figment of your imagination. Wow! It's a convincer

You haven't presented any evidence that supports your argument. You have presented evidence that you are gullible and the useful tool of sociopathic religious charlatans.

It sounds like the God is a twit.

Here we go! So your God wishes people dead. It wants another fictional character to kill them. AND YOU SUPPORT AND PROMOTE THAT! That makes you a terrible person. Just take 5 minutes to think that through. Ask yourself why you hate other people so much. You are happy for them to die. You glorify it. Aren't you just a tiny bit ashamed of yourself?

It wasn't god who separated the water, it was an angry troll called Gretchen. You have to believe in Gretchen or you'll be sent to Scunthorpe. It's in the book.

Guess who?

[Bored chemist]

If I got something wrong, by all means, prove it.

I did. You ignored it.

[Bored chemist]

Piece by piece, step by step, precept upon precept, we will take apart the conclusions you reached.

Well, some of them; maybe.

But what you won't have is proof that there's a God.

[duffyd]

im by no means a scientist or even highly educated. but the last 20 odd years (since the internet) it always seems to be my hobby to learn about all things science. if i could have my life over i would have studied hard and tried to become some kind of braniac.

so in all my reading about all kinds of subjects there is always the same common underlying theme that is there if you decide to see it. that the religions of the world are just wrong.

there is so much scientific and mathematical evidence against the bible that it is just staggering that any educated (scientific) person accepts it. for a laymen i get it. the whole 'feel good' or 'someone watching down upon us' is a very sobering thought. and if you dont know any better than why not believe it. (that used to be me) but anyone that bothers to invest the time to learn about the world around us and learns a bit from each field of science(and maths) can easily see that the bible just simply does not correspond with what we observe in the world. (this is inherently different to the concept of a creator though)

so, given all the knowledge that man has now, why do people still consider the bible as 'more' than a story book

Dr. Collins answers your question, as I said. Did you get a chance to read his book? I guess not. I guess you don't want the answer because by any measure he's a scientist and he believes the bible.

[duffyd]

im by no means a scientist or even highly educated. but the last 20 odd years (since the internet) it always seems to be my hobby to learn about all things science. if i could have my life over i would have studied hard and tried to become some kind of braniac.

so in all my reading about all kinds of subjects there is always the same common underlying theme that is there if you decide to see it. that the religions of the world are just wrong.

there is so much scientific and mathematical evidence against the bible that it is just staggering that any educated (scientific) person accepts it. for a laymen i get it. the whole 'feel good' or 'someone watching down upon us' is a very sobering thought. and if you dont know any better than why not believe it. (that used to be me) but anyone that bothers to invest the time to learn about the world around us and learns a bit from each field of science(and maths) can easily see that the bible just simply does not correspond with what we observe in the world. (this is inherently different to the concept of a creator though)

so, given all the knowledge that man has now, why do people still consider the bible as 'more' than a story book

Dr. Collins answers your question, as I said. Did you get a chance to read his book? I guess not. I guess you don't want the answer because by any measure he's a scientist and he believes the bible.

He is real to me and to hundreds of millions of others. Scientifically, that is evidence that HE is real. Random folks with no ulterior motives from every walk of life, many without knowledge of the others, tell the same story.
No one spoke as He did. Not even close--unless He's being imitated or referenced. He is completely unique and so are the statements He made. He continuously claimed He was God and proved it through numerous miracles. Even the phrases He used are miraculous. Throughout all recorded history, He alone presented Himself as the One True God and confounded utterly the wisest, most educated, the most elite religious leaders of His day and He does so today, too.
HE proved beyond a shadow of turning that even death couldn't defeat Him. His disciples saw Him, spoke to Him, touched Him, even ate food with Him after He was murdered and buried. They knew He rose from the dead just as He said He would. Assured of His resurrection, they endured terrible persecution for proclaiming that truth and soon they turned the world right side up.
The words HE used have withstood 2,000 years of the most focused scrutiny. Everything He said has proven to be true. Not bad.