4 minutes ago, Hummin said:

There is one thing that is essentially wrong with your statement. Scientists do not dismiss a God or a creator. They dismiss the Bible as the answer to the creation of the universe. Some scientists are religious, but that is faith and belief, not science.

Karma exists so the Buddhists are more right than the Christians.

10 minutes ago, Rockyroad said:

Karma exists so the Buddhists are more right than the Christians.

Karma exists as belief. And if someone believes in it strongly enough, they may start acting in ways that make it real in their own life.

Not as a cosmic law, but as psychology, behaviour, and consequence. And if you hope someone you dislike should be hit by karma, and you believe in karma, karma will hit back at you.

2 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Karma exists as belief. And if someone believes in it strongly enough, they may start acting in ways that make it real in their own life.

Not as a cosmic law, but as psychology, behaviour, and consequence. And if you hope someone you dislike should be hit by karma, and you believe in karma, karma will hit back at you.

If you treat 50 people well some of them will do you favours, that is karma.

If you smile at people they tend to smile back. That is karma.

The world is a mirror.

17 minutes ago, Rockyroad said:

If you treat 50 people well some of them will do you favours, that is karma.

If you smile at people they tend to smile back. That is karma.

The world is a mirror.

True, very true.

Happy to agree with you on this one. This is a life philosophy I like to practice.

5 minutes ago, Hummin said:

True, very true.

Happy to agree with you on this one. This is a life philosophy I like to practice.

It holds true for most people and Thais definately fit this mould. Less likely amongst farangs though due to being more critical which is western mind of a broken world. The eastern mind accepts the world.

Westerners prefer negative people. Trump is Hitler. Climate is stuffed. Extreme views dominate their thoughts. Black and white thinking. Heaven and hell. Centuries of brain washing.

1 hour ago, Rockyroad said:

You have not defined god in a way for a test. Where does he live?

EVERYWHERE.

God lives everywhere.

6 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

EVERYWHERE.

God lives everywhere.

God is everything

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

God is everything

Every SINGLE thing?

What is the MINUTEST thing God might be, for example?

35 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Every SINGLE thing?

What is the MINUTEST thing God might be, for example?

Honestly Gamma, not a living thing on this planet knows what God is or what God means. We can believe, but knowing is a different thing.

3 hours ago, Hummin said:

Honestly Gamma, not a living thing on this planet knows what God is or what God means. We can believe, but knowing is a different thing.

We can know that we do not know.

This is not difficult.

But, it is not easy to know what we do not know.

This is hard.

It's a hard.

It's a hard.

It's a hard.

Dig....THIS......

Edited June 24Jun 24 by GammaGlobulin

5 hours ago, Hummin said:

There is one thing that is essentially wrong with your statement. Scientists do not dismiss a God or a creator. They dismiss the Bible as the answer to the creation of the universe. Some scientists are religious, but that is faith and belief, not science.

What I was referring to was that many scientists think there is a God. I know some think the way the universe was created was different than what the Bible says, but it's still God who created it in whatever way he knew how.

9 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

What is unsubstantiated?

I don’t need to prove a negative, you need to prove he exists.

Science has proven the biblical creation story is a load of tosh.

Science has proven the existence of Eve is a load of tosh. Even the story doesn’t hold water, if god created them, how come their child Cain went to another city and married? You know all this but you don’t question it and it’s clearly nonsense.

You were taught as a child god was in the sky and heaven was above that. Science has proven that’s a load of tosh.

The bible says the earth is about 5,000 years old, science has proven that’s a load of tosh.

Science has proven how the universe was created, what has not been understood is how the big bang occurs.

There is always a beginning, what was god’s beginning? How was he created? Who by?

You have a closed mind, you’re not asking the important questions.

Fred, I assume you escaped the belief in Santa Claus, I’m surprised you can hang on to this supernatural nonsense with no proof.

I don't have to prove anything is where you're not understanding. The millions of believers have faith, and that's all we need. Science has proven nothing of if a God exists or not, and the universe has a creator, unlike what some of them think. I was never taught God was in the sky but everywhere. That he's in another dimension is obvious to me and others. As always, different people think of different things.

God obviously made more people after Adam and Eve but they were the first modern humans.There is also this.........Sibling or Close Relative (Literalist View): The most straightforward explanation is that Cain married one of his sisters or nieces. Because the world's first family had no other people to intermarry with, these unions were necessary for humanity to grow. Biologically, incest at this time would not have carried the genetic risks seen today because Adam and Eve were created with perfect DNA, making mutations non-existent in the initial generations.

1. Pre-Adamic or Separate Populations (Alternative View): Some interpretations suggest that other distinct populations of humans (sometimes referred to as pre-Adamic humans) lived outside the Garden of Eden. In this view, when Cain was exiled to the land of Nod, he encountered and married a woman from one of these other groups. I always believed it was behind door number 2.

No, the Bible does not explicitly state the age of the Earth.

The widely cited estimate of roughly 6,000 to 10,000 years comes from calculating and adding up the generational lineages, ages, and timelines recorded in biblical texts, most famously calculated by Archbishop James Ussher in the 17th century. Because this number is the result of external human calculation rather than a direct statement, there are varying interpretations among Christians regarding the age of the Earth:

Young Earth Interpretation: By calculating genealogies (like those in Genesis 5 and 11) and interpreting the "days" of creation literally, many scholars estimate the Earth to be approximately 6,000 years old. Proponents of this view believe God created dinosaurs alongside humans on Day Six, meaning they did not live millions of years ago

Old Earth Interpretation: Many Christians and theologians accept the scientific consensus that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. In this view, dinosaurs roamed the Earth millions of years before humans existed, and the creation days in Genesis are interpreted as representing long, figurative periods of time rather than 24-hour days.

I see that it's actually you that has a closed mind, as mine isn't that way and never has been. That I choose common sense and faith and you go by a few other's opinions shows it well, so again, stick to the topic, seeing you aren't reading but skimming.

Edited June 24Jun 24 by fredwiggy

5 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Every SINGLE thing?

What is the MINUTEST thing God might be, for example?

Do god is a dung beetle and a snake

9 minutes ago, Rockyroad said:

Do god is a dung beetle and a snake

My Snake is My God.....

7 hours ago, Rockyroad said:

You have not defined god in a way for a test. Where does he live?

Silicon Valley?

14 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Silicon Valley?

Did you say Silicone Valleys?

Because, if you did, then I can believe in this.....

Edited June 24Jun 24 by GammaGlobulin

2 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

I don't have to prove anything is where you're not understanding. The millions of believers have faith, and that's all we need. Science has proven nothing of if a God exists or not, and the universe has a creator, unlike what some of them think. I was never taught God was in the sky but everywhere. That he's in another dimension is obvious to me and others. As always, different people think of different things.

God obviously made more people after Adam and Eve but they were the first modern humans.There is also this.........Sibling or Close Relative (Literalist View): The most straightforward explanation is that Cain married one of his sisters or nieces. Because the world's first family had no other people to intermarry with, these unions were necessary for humanity to grow. Biologically, incest at this time would not have carried the genetic risks seen today because Adam and Eve were created with perfect DNA, making mutations non-existent in the initial generations.

1. Pre-Adamic or Separate Populations (Alternative View): Some interpretations suggest that other distinct populations of humans (sometimes referred to as pre-Adamic humans) lived outside the Garden of Eden. In this view, when Cain was exiled to the land of Nod, he encountered and married a woman from one of these other groups. I always believed it was behind door number 2.

No, the Bible does not explicitly state the age of the Earth.

The widely cited estimate of roughly 6,000 to 10,000 years comes from calculating and adding up the generational lineages, ages, and timelines recorded in biblical texts, most famously calculated by Archbishop James Ussher in the 17th century. Because this number is the result of external human calculation rather than a direct statement, there are varying interpretations among Christians regarding the age of the Earth:

Young Earth Interpretation: By calculating genealogies (like those in Genesis 5 and 11) and interpreting the "days" of creation literally, many scholars estimate the Earth to be approximately 6,000 years old. Proponents of this view believe God created dinosaurs alongside humans on Day Six, meaning they did not live millions of years ago

Old Earth Interpretation: Many Christians and theologians accept the scientific consensus that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. In this view, dinosaurs roamed the Earth millions of years before humans existed, and the creation days in Genesis are interpreted as representing long, figurative periods of time rather than 24-hour days.

I see that it's actually you that has a closed mind, as mine isn't that way and never has been. That I choose common sense and faith and you go by a few other's opinions shows it well, so again, stick to the topic, seeing you aren't reading but skimming.

I think people conflate god with a creator.

I don’t believe there are any gods, but I don’t discount there being a creator of the big bang. But everything that happened after the big bang is science and has no external influence.

I can see your doing some research, but instead of thinking about it you’re trotting it out and bastardizing it to try and make it fit your narrative.

For example, Adam and Eve. Science has proven they could never have existed. It’s not a theory it’s a fact. You arrive at fantastical theories about how Cain could have found another city and more people. You’re filling in the gaps with invention.

The same goes for the age of the earth and now invention about how the dinosaurs fit in to that.

Presumably you have a theory about how the earth is flat and above us is the firmament holding back the waters?

You can’t say my mind is closed Fred. I used to be a Christian like you, but I found too many inconsistencies and went out and researched in detail.

Your research, I suspect AI assisted, is how to find solutions to these inconsistencies that fits your faith. You’re coming at this with a closed mind.

I think JC was a real man who taught mindfulness, there are hints in your bible he did this. E.g. “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21).

It becomes much clearer in the apocrypha, e.g. the gospel of Thomas, “If your leaders say to you, ‘Look, the kingdom is in the sky,’ then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, ‘It is in the sea,’ then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living Father.”

To summarize, Jesus frequently taught about the Kingdom of God as present yet future, spiritual rather than purely earthly (e.g., parables in Matthew 13). Related ideas include the Holy Spirit indwelling believers (post-resurrection) and union with God.

Regarding Heaven, belief in god is not important, only keeping the commandments is important. A man asks Jesus: “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?”

•  Jesus replies: “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” (Matthew 19:17)

I’m aware there is another verse saying the only way is through belief. However, if we apply the test of goodness, only the one I stated passes the test. It’s clear the other was fabricated to give the church control.

My piano teacher is a late convert to Christianity and we discussed people who had never heard of JC or god not going to heaven and she said she wrestled with that. We discussed Matthew 19:17 and that put her mind at rest.

Her major takeaway from our discussion was the test of goodness. god can only be all good, any mention of evil needs to be permanently erased. If you truly believe in god and that god is all good, it’s impossible to accept what is clearly not good. The fact these passages exist in the bible makes it clear there cannot have been any divine intervention in their creation.

God = good

Church = bad

3 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

I think people conflate god with a creator.

I don’t believe there are any gods, but I don’t discount there being a creator of the big bang. But everything that happened after the big bang is science and has no external influence.

I can see your doing some research, but instead of thinking about it you’re trotting it out and bastardizing it to try and make it fit your narrative.

For example, Adam and Eve. Science has proven they could never have existed. It’s not a theory it’s a fact. You arrive at fantastical theories about how Cain could have found another city and more people. You’re filling in the gaps with invention.

The same goes for the age of the earth and now invention about how the dinosaurs fit in to that.

Presumably you have a theory about how the earth is flat and above us is the firmament holding back the waters?

You can’t say my mind is closed Fred. I used to be a Christian like you, but I found too many inconsistencies and went out and researched in detail.

Your research, I suspect AI assisted, is how to find solutions to these inconsistencies that fits your faith. You’re coming at this with a closed mind.

I think JC was a real man who taught mindfulness, there are hints in your bible he did this. E.g. “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21).

It becomes much clearer in the apocrypha, e.g. the gospel of Thomas, “If your leaders say to you, ‘Look, the kingdom is in the sky,’ then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, ‘It is in the sea,’ then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living Father.”

To summarize, Jesus frequently taught about the Kingdom of God as present yet future, spiritual rather than purely earthly (e.g., parables in Matthew 13). Related ideas include the Holy Spirit indwelling believers (post-resurrection) and union with God.

Regarding Heaven, belief in god is not important, only keeping the commandments is important. A man asks Jesus: “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?”

•  Jesus replies: “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” (Matthew 19:17)

I’m aware there is another verse saying the only way is through belief. However, if we apply the test of goodness, only the one I stated passes the test. It’s clear the other was fabricated to give the church control.

My piano teacher is a late convert to Christianity and we discussed people who had never heard of JC or god not going to heaven and she said she wrestled with that. We discussed Matthew 19:17 and that put her mind at rest.

Her major takeaway from our discussion was the test of goodness. god can only be all good, any mention of evil needs to be permanently erased. If you truly believe in god and that god is all good, it’s impossible to accept what is clearly not good. The fact these passages exist in the bible makes it clear there cannot have been any divine intervention in their creation.

God = good

Church = bad

I'm not doing research but finding a quick AI to prove a point, as I already have know this since childhood. I don't have a narrative. It's just the way it's been all along. I already spoke about Adam and Eve and the possibilities.

All I have said is easily researched but seeing you wouldn't believe in God if he fell on your head, there's no reason to continue. Just say what you believe in and why and let it go. I can say you believe what you believe as it suits your narrative, researching other's opinions.

Regarding heaven, God isn't important but following his commandments is? Read the first four. It's like you're drunk while replying, knowing some things but forgetting others, and what you've said prior. God is all good, but he puts certain people in their place or worse because they didn't care about his commandments, and went much further.

This is for you, although, like I said, your beliefs are gone, so it's best to not enter conversations with believers and think you're going to sway them, let alone work on assuming what they know..............

“If the Bible was written by man, I can’t trust it.”

That sounds deep until you realize something:

Every history book you’ve ever trusted was written by man.

Your science textbook was written by man.

Your medical textbook was written by man.

Your government records were written by man.

Your news articles were written by man.

So the real question is not:

“Was it written by man?”

The real question is:

“Is what was written trustworthy?”

Because if you reject the Bible simply because humans wrote it, then be consistent.

Reject your history books too.

How do you know Abraham Lincoln existed?

How do you know Julius Caesar existed?

How do you know wars happened?

How do you know ancient empires rose and fell?

You know because of documents.

Witnesses.

Manuscripts.

Historical records.

Archaeology.

Testimony.

That is how history works.

So why do people apply one standard to every other historical document and a completely different standard to the Bible?

That’s not intellectual honesty.

That’s bias.

Now let’s deal with this:

“The Bible is just a fairytale.”

Really?

Then why does it go against almost every natural desire of sinful humanity?

If men invented the Bible to control people, they did a terrible job making themselves look good.

The Bible exposes its heroes.

Noah gets drunk.

Abraham lies.

Moses murders.

David commits adultery.

Peter denies Jesus.

Thomas doubts.

Paul persecutes Christians.

The disciples constantly misunderstand Jesus.

What kind of propaganda makes its leaders look weak, sinful, fearful, and in need of grace?

Human-made religious myths usually glorify their heroes.

The Bible exposes them.

Why?

Because the Bible is not trying to make man look good.

It is revealing how desperately man needs God.

The Bible tells your flesh:

Deny yourself.

Forgive your enemies.

Flee sexual immorality.

Love your wife like Christ loved the Church.

Submit to God.

Repent.

Crucify the flesh.

Care for the poor.

Be holy.

Tell the truth.

Do not worship money.

Do not live by lust.

Do not return evil for evil.

Does that sound like a book designed to satisfy man’s desires?

No.

It confronts them.

And that is one reason the Bible still offends people.

Not because it is weak.

Because it tells the truth about the human heart.

Then people say:

“I don’t believe the Bible. I believe science.”

Okay.

Who wrote your science book?

Humans.

Who conducted the studies?

Humans.

Who interpreted the data?

Humans.

Do we throw science away because humans are involved?

No.

We test claims.

We examine evidence.

We compare sources.

We ask if the conclusions are reliable.

That same standard should be applied to Scripture.

The Bible is not afraid of investigation.

It has survived empires.

Atheists.

Critics.

Philosophers.

Kings.

Governments.

Persecution.

Burnings.

Bans.

And 2,000 years later, people are still trying to disprove it while quoting moral categories they borrowed from it.

And let’s talk about Jesus.

People don’t reject Jesus because there is no evidence He existed.

Even many secular historians acknowledge Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical person.

The deeper issue is not whether Jesus walked the earth.

The deeper issue is what His life demands.

If Jesus rose from the dead, then He is not merely a teacher.

He is Lord.

And that is what people are really resisting.

Because if Jesus is Lord, then culture is not.

Your feelings are not.

Your desires are not.

Your truth is not.

Your body is not your god.

Your opinion is not final.

He is.

So stop hiding behind:

“The Bible was written by man.”

That is not an argument.

That is an excuse.

God used men to write Scripture, but Scripture reveals a message man would never naturally create:

A holy God.

A sinful humanity.

A Savior crucified.

A resurrection.

A call to repent.

A command to die to self.

And a Kingdom where Jesus reigns.

The Bible was written through men.

But it did not originate from man.

Because no sinful man would invent a book that dethrones him, exposes him, corrects him, humbles him, and commands him to bow before Christ.

The problem is not that the Bible lacks credibility.

The problem is that once you take it seriously, it demands surrender.

And that is why many people don’t reject it with their mind first.

They reject it with their will..

I just stumbled on a new Youtube channel, so I will be posting a few videos from it here in case anyone is interested.

His thesis is that Christianity was created to topple the Roman Empire.

And atheists who dismiss Christianity as "fairy tales" miss the point that it was one of the biggest "psychological upgrades in human history".

Anyway, very weird stuff. Maybe not many people interested.

In this video I suggest that perhaps Christianity's early days served as a mode of psychological warfare against the Roman Empire.

If God Real Why Bad Thing Happen?

I didn't watch the whole thing yet, but FYI in case anyone is interested.

I'm guessing no one?

Gamma? You in?

The elite are not atheists. They just hate God.

If you were raised in the West, you were taught that belief in spirituality is foolish at best and dangerous at worst.

Is The Matrix about Jesus?

If so, the mythology is still relevant today.

Beneath the simulation lies a much older story. Here's why The Matrix may be one of the most powerful retellings of the story of Jesus Christ ever put on screen.

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

I just stumbled on a new Youtube channel, so I will be posting a few videos from it here in case anyone is interested.

His thesis is that Christianity was created to topple the Roman Empire.

And atheists who dismiss Christianity as "fairy tales" miss the point that it was one of the biggest "psychological upgrades in human history".

Anyway, very weird stuff. Maybe not many people interested.

In this video I suggest that perhaps Christianity's early days served as a mode of psychological warfare against the Roman Empire.

Well, of course, it is true that christiantity presented a threat to the Roman empire.

Probably, that is not deniable.

39 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Well, of course, it is true that christiantity presented a threat to the Roman empire.

Probably, that is not deniable.

Yes, I agree with that. Christianity clearly presented a threat to the Roman Empire, not because the first Christians had military power, but because their loyalty was placed above Rome, the emperor, and the old religious order. Any movement that gives people a higher authority than the state will be seen as dangerous by an empire.

Same pattern with communism later. Both started as threats to the established order, were harassed and suppressed, then changed when they grew and touched power. Christianity challenged Rome’s loyalty system, emperor worship, and social order. Communism challenged class power, property, monarchy, church, and capitalism. Both gave ordinary people a bigger story and a future liberation.

But when Christianity became shaped by emperors and church politics, it became controlled religion. When communism became state power, it became party control. Modern socialism is more like a controlled version of that revolutionary impulse, softened by democracy, law, and compromise.

1 hour ago, Hummin said:

Yes, I agree with that. Christianity clearly presented a threat to the Roman Empire, not because the first Christians had military power, but because their loyalty was placed above Rome, the emperor, and the old religious order. Any movement that gives people a higher authority than the state will be seen as dangerous by an empire.

Same pattern with communism later. Both started as threats to the established order, were harassed and suppressed, then changed when they grew and touched power. Christianity challenged Rome’s loyalty system, emperor worship, and social order. Communism challenged class power, property, monarchy, church, and capitalism. Both gave ordinary people a bigger story and a future liberation.

But when Christianity became shaped by emperors and church politics, it became controlled religion. When communism became state power, it became party control. Modern socialism is more like a controlled version of that revolutionary impulse, softened by democracy, law, and compromise.

Yes.

No loyalty to Rome.

Pilate and all that stuff.

Important Note: Pilate was not a pilot, and never learned how to fly.

8 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Important Note: Pilate was not a pilot, and never learned how to fly.

I don't think he did Pilates or Yoga either.

The Romans degraded people on the cross.

Jesus was exalted on the cross.

They flipped the script.

On 6/25/2026 at 11:38 AM, fredwiggy said:

I'm not doing research but finding a quick AI to prove a point, as I already have know this since childhood. I don't have a narrative. It's just the way it's been all along. I already spoke about Adam and Eve and the possibilities.

All I have said is easily researched but seeing you wouldn't believe in God if he fell on your head, there's no reason to continue. Just say what you believe in and why and let it go. I can say you believe what you believe as it suits your narrative, researching other's opinions.

Regarding heaven, God isn't important but following his commandments is? Read the first four. It's like you're drunk while replying, knowing some things but forgetting others, and what you've said prior. God is all good, but he puts certain people in their place or worse because they didn't care about his commandments, and went much further.

This is for you, although, like I said, your beliefs are gone, so it's best to not enter conversations with believers and think you're going to sway them, let alone work on assuming what they know..............

“If the Bible was written by man, I can’t trust it.”

That sounds deep until you realize something:

Every history book you’ve ever trusted was written by man.

Your science textbook was written by man.

Your medical textbook was written by man.

Your government records were written by man.

Your news articles were written by man.

So the real question is not:

“Was it written by man?”

The real question is:

“Is what was written trustworthy?”

Because if you reject the Bible simply because humans wrote it, then be consistent.

Reject your history books too.

How do you know Abraham Lincoln existed?

How do you know Julius Caesar existed?

How do you know wars happened?

How do you know ancient empires rose and fell?

You know because of documents.

Witnesses.

Manuscripts.

Historical records.

Archaeology.

Testimony.

That is how history works.

So why do people apply one standard to every other historical document and a completely different standard to the Bible?

That’s not intellectual honesty.

That’s bias.

Now let’s deal with this:

“The Bible is just a fairytale.”

Really?

Then why does it go against almost every natural desire of sinful humanity?

If men invented the Bible to control people, they did a terrible job making themselves look good.

The Bible exposes its heroes.

Noah gets drunk.

Abraham lies.

Moses murders.

David commits adultery.

Peter denies Jesus.

Thomas doubts.

Paul persecutes Christians.

The disciples constantly misunderstand Jesus.

What kind of propaganda makes its leaders look weak, sinful, fearful, and in need of grace?

Human-made religious myths usually glorify their heroes.

The Bible exposes them.

Why?

Because the Bible is not trying to make man look good.

It is revealing how desperately man needs God.

The Bible tells your flesh:

Deny yourself.

Forgive your enemies.

Flee sexual immorality.

Love your wife like Christ loved the Church.

Submit to God.

Repent.

Crucify the flesh.

Care for the poor.

Be holy.

Tell the truth.

Do not worship money.

Do not live by lust.

Do not return evil for evil.

Does that sound like a book designed to satisfy man’s desires?

No.

It confronts them.

And that is one reason the Bible still offends people.

Not because it is weak.

Because it tells the truth about the human heart.

Then people say:

“I don’t believe the Bible. I believe science.”

Okay.

Who wrote your science book?

Humans.

Who conducted the studies?

Humans.

Who interpreted the data?

Humans.

Do we throw science away because humans are involved?

No.

We test claims.

We examine evidence.

We compare sources.

We ask if the conclusions are reliable.

That same standard should be applied to Scripture.

The Bible is not afraid of investigation.

It has survived empires.

Atheists.

Critics.

Philosophers.

Kings.

Governments.

Persecution.

Burnings.

Bans.

And 2,000 years later, people are still trying to disprove it while quoting moral categories they borrowed from it.

And let’s talk about Jesus.

People don’t reject Jesus because there is no evidence He existed.

Even many secular historians acknowledge Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical person.

The deeper issue is not whether Jesus walked the earth.

The deeper issue is what His life demands.

If Jesus rose from the dead, then He is not merely a teacher.

He is Lord.

And that is what people are really resisting.

Because if Jesus is Lord, then culture is not.

Your feelings are not.

Your desires are not.

Your truth is not.

Your body is not your god.

Your opinion is not final.

He is.

So stop hiding behind:

“The Bible was written by man.”

That is not an argument.

That is an excuse.

God used men to write Scripture, but Scripture reveals a message man would never naturally create:

A holy God.

A sinful humanity.

A Savior crucified.

A resurrection.

A call to repent.

A command to die to self.

And a Kingdom where Jesus reigns.

The Bible was written through men.

But it did not originate from man.

Because no sinful man would invent a book that dethrones him, exposes him, corrects him, humbles him, and commands him to bow before Christ.

The problem is not that the Bible lacks credibility.

The problem is that once you take it seriously, it demands surrender.

And that is why many people don’t reject it with their mind first.

They reject it with their will..

The only pout your proving Fred is that your bigoted in your views, and a zealot.

23 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

The only pout your proving Fred is that your bigoted in your views, and a zealot.

Actually I've pointed out things you already should have known.

That you're an atheist now is the reason you disagree.

I'm a believer, period. How could I be a bigot if I've lived all my life non prejudiced?

I haven't said if you don't believe you will burn in hell, as that's God's deal and not mine.

I don't hate those who don't believe, as it's on them and nothing to do with me. I'm not intolerant of what you believe so I'm not a zealot and I've asked you many times to state what you believe in, but you keep coming back at me and trying to disprove my beliefs, when I've asked you just to again state what you believe in, as per the OP. My beliefs aren't unreasonable nor are yours, as it's a personal thing. I'm not preaching here but again just telling how I feel about my God. A couple of things I posted were other's words.

You were a believer so should understand a little more how I feel, than someone who started out with another religion that doesn't glorify God or taught an atheist from birth.

Edited June 26Jun 26 by fredwiggy

No.

I don't believe in "anything"

I only believe in Spinoza's God.

Which is literally everything

Don't tell me you believe in Mr Hand?

The Hand of God controls reality to make things easy for you because you BE-LIEVE.

Really?

I don't think "Mr Hand" is a very smart bet.

https://youtu.be/d77KVMh91kk?si=jg4ZM0jpgLsR2zDm