Actually, I’m exhausted too. I’ve had a LOT of work lately and it’s been keeping me really busy – so I know how you feel! Reading through your response, one thing that strikes me is that you always take the time to think about the questions I ask and you try your best to answer – and then you ask me questions. That is so normal in most discussions but so many times in discussions about religion, for some reason the Christians (and other theists) just ignore the questions (or they try other ways to evade them) and then go off on other tangents. So thanks for making this a good discussion!

The reason or reasons why I would not change my mind about believing in God is because evolution doesn’t answer the origin the of life.

I have to say, that’s not a very good reason on 2 counts. First, evolution doesn’t seek to answer questions about life’s orgins; it seeks to answer questions about how one life form evolve from an earlier life form. The field of abiogenesis seeks to answer the question of how life originated from non-living material. If you’re looking to evolution for an explanation of how life began, you’re looking in the wrong place! Please don’t take the following as any kind of personal criticism because I don’t meant it to be – but simply take it as an observation by someone who knows more about a particular subject than you do (as I’m certain you know more than I do about many other subjects): if you think evolution is about the origin of life, then you don’t understand the very basics of evolution theory (or abiogenesis for that matter). So you don’t really know enough about it to make a good decision about whether it makes sense to you or not – I recommend some further inquiry. Here’s an excellent book on abiogenesis and the various sciences that contribute to the field: http://www.amazon.com/Lifes-Origin-Beginnings-Biological-Evolution/dp/0520233913/ref=pd_bbs_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217425333&sr=8-5 It covers the topic with a broad brush and is both an easy and delightful read.

Second, if you did understand the basics about evolution (really abiogenesis – see above) and you felt that it doesn’t adequately answer the questions of life’s origins, then why do you feel that God does answer the question more adequately? It seems that belief in God only generates an even more difficult question: where did God come from? If God is a life form, how did he come from nothing? Or if he always existed, then why couldn’t the fabric of space and time have always existed? Given the fabric of space and time, science offers a compelling account of how the universe began, and how life began from the stuff of the universe, and how we humans evolved from the first life.

As far as changing my mind with other religious beliefs the Bible is the only source of truth we have and any practice or religious belief that agrees with it is the one I’d prefer to follow.

I think I missed something: you know that “the Bible is the only source of truth we have” how? In fact, how do you know that the Bible is true at all? What do you think about archaeological evidence, for example, that proves that Jericho was uninhabited (and the walls around the city were already collapsed) at the time that Joshua was purported to blow the horn such that “the walls came a-tumblin’ down”?

Now about miracles. Have you ever seen one? How about demonic activity or maybe ghost? Have you heard about any encounters with stuff like that? What do naturalist say about it?

I’ve seen “ghosts” before – but being ever the skeptic, I’ve always walked right up to them, only to discover that it was just a funny shadow, or a shirt on the bedpost in the dark, etc. I’ve also heard “ghosts” but was always able to find the real origin of the spooky noise. I have heard of those accounts, but I’ve also heard interviews with many people who thought they have seen ghosts and not a single account holds up to scrutiny. I think most of the people who say they have seen ghosts really believe it, they simply haven’t examined their own experience with a critical eye.

Of course naturalists would say that any accounts with ghosts that they know of either turned out to be inconclusive, or they have turned out to have natural origins. If they ever encountered a ghost story that they believed was true, they would by definition no longer be naturalists. ;)

What are the verses you know of that would separate the Trinity. John chapter 17 explains the union of the Pather and the Son…

Regarding John 17, the chapter is absolutely chock full with verses that show that Jesus and the Father are separate beings. For one thing, it starts off with Jesus praying to the Father – is he really praying to himself? Here are just a few examples of how even this chapter indicates different beings:

Joh 17:2 “As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.” – the Father gives power to Jesus – therefore the Father is not Jesus

Joh 17:3 “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” – the Father sent Jesus, therefore the Father is not Jesus

Joh 17:4 “I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.” – the Father gave to Jesus, therefore the Father is not Jesus.

Here are just a few (from a very large list) from other books:

1Th 1:10, Gal_1:1 – God, the Father, raised Jesus from the dead. Jesus was dead, God was alive.

Phi 2:6 – “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal [Strong's: similar] with God” (therefore he wasn’t actually the Father – just similar to him)

Phi 2:9 – God exalted Jesus (did God exalt himself? How much more exalted can the Father get?)

Gal 1:3-4 – Jesus died according to the Father’s will (not his own)

John chapter 14:10 says “Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works.”…2 Corinthians chapter 6:19-20 “Or do you not know that your body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price, therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.”

Those are excellent examples. If we look at both Joh 14:10 and 2Co 6:19-20, we see that the term “in” as in “in you” or “in me” doesn’t mean that the entities are the same being. For example “the Holy Spirit, who is in you” doesn’t mean that you and the Holy Spirit are the same being. In the same way, “I am in the Father and the Father in Me” doesn’t mean the the Father and Jesus are the same being.

Also, when Jesus says “I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me”, he is stating point blank that his authority and the Father’s authority is not the same authority – then the Father and Jesus cannot be the same person.

From an Armenian view point I’m assuming that pharoah hadn’t hardened his heart yet and God just hardened before pharoah was going to make that choice.

What do you think about free will vs. God’s manipulation of Pharaoh’s decision?

I believe that God inspired writings.

Which writings to you believe are inspired and why? And to what extent – word-for-word dictation? How do the contradictions in the Bible effect your belief about its inspiration?

The Bible just foretells the second coming of Christ at a time that we don’t know.

About the 2nd coming, what do you make of these verses that seem to indicate that the 2nd coming was scheduled for about 2000 years ago?

Mat 16:28 “Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.”

Luk 9:27 “But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.”

That behavior really does show how serious people took putting the Bible together. I don’t think that God encouraged their behavior. I just think that human weakness gets in the way but God still uses it for His purposes.

Then if God didn’t encourage their behavior, then their behavior (that is, the canonization process) wasn’t inspired. Right?

The reason or reasons why I would not change my mind about believing in God is because evolution doesn’t answer the origin the of life. Logic would tell you that has to be a cause and then an effect. As far as changing my mind with other religious beliefs the Bible is the only source of truth we have and any practice or religious belief that agrees with it is the one I’d prefer to follow. If you value the Bible as truth then you can’t go wrong being in a church that teaches it accurately. A calvinist would say that I have no choice in the matter on whether to believe in God or the Bible. He’s given me the faith. Sounds kind of funny. Also I’ve been in the faith too long to deny that it’s real. My life is headed in a direction that I have no say in. So not only does it make sense that God or a Creator began this life, I’m also in a position that wouldn’t direct my life any other way. It’s kind of neat but scary too.

Now about miracles. Have you ever seen one? How about demonic activity or maybe ghost? Have you heard about any encounters with stuff like that? What do naturalist say about it?

Calvinist have a hard time convinving Armenians that God gives you the faith to be saved. Armenians have a hard time believing that view because it distorts their view of a loving Father. That message says that not everyone has the opportunity to be saved which feels unfair. I’ve heard someone say that Armenians want to believe that it’s in their ability to choose or reject God. Also, the calvinist message really rips out the joy of sharing the gospel with people. There is nothing an Armenian can say or do to convince a person to folllow Jesus. There is nothing an unbeliever can do to earn salvation because God has already made up His mind who He’s going to show mercy to. But I guess if an unbeliever had a desire for God He’s probably dtawing them to Him. If God has a soveriegn purpose then won’t He bring everyone He has chosen to faith all on His own? Then why should Christians try to convince people to live for God? There are a group of people that believe like this. They are called the hyper-calvinist. They don’t believe in ministering to people because God will do it on His own.

The Armenian appeals more to the will and emphasizes how a loving Father sent His son Jesus to die on the cross for the sins that we’ve committed. God’s righteous judgement would be sending us to hell but Jesus paid the price because He loves you. If you were to come to faith can you see how that could make you feel important and loved. The Calvinist does believe that this message is true but they also believe that it is all for God’s glory and pleasure. So in other words it sounds like an alterior motive.

What are the verses you know of that would separate the Trinity. John chapter 17 explains the union of the Pather and the Son and how a believer relates with the two. John chapter 14:10 says “Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works.” In scripture Jesus says that the Holy spirit dwells in the heart of a believer. 2 Corinthians chapter 6:19-20 “Or do you not know that your body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price, therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.” As a believer, just as His Spirit would dwell in me I guess that it is how it would be in the Trinity. That reminds me of “The Lion King” movie, how the monkey tells Simba that he knows Simba’s father, “He lives in you.”

I guess you’re right when you say that no one may know if they are truly saved. That’s why the calvinist worries if they are truly saved, especially when they do bad things and the Armenian worries if they will lose God if they do something bad.

When I was in High School my mom was so frustrated with me because I wasn’t interested in parties or I didn’t have this spunky personality that she always wanted. She kept telling to go out. She even took me and my friends cruising one time. That’s where guys and girls hooked up. I was too mature for my age and I read my Bible all the time. So one day I wanted my parents to see what I could be like without God in my life and then maybe they would want my real self back. I went to raves, parties, and ended up with guys. One day when I was at a rave I felt so out of place and a deep hunger that I couldn’t quench. The depression came back. I was scared and I was drawn back to my faith in God. I tried to walk away from God and it didn’t work. Maybe I am truly saved or maybe God’s not done using me while I’m thinking I’m saved. Who knows?

From an Armenian view point I’m assuming that pharoah hadn’t hardened his heart yet and God just hardened before pharoah was going to make that choice. From a Calvinist perspective I’m assuming that God controls everything and therefore can do what He wants.

I believe that God inspired writings. However, we as the imperfect beings we are make errors. So maybe people messed up on the way to completing the Bible.

I see pupose in it in the sense that different religious groups have come out of it. The Bible prophesies about the end times. Such things as there will be false prophets, people who will only hear what their itching ears want to hear, some who deny the faith, and so on. We live in New Testament times. The Old Testament was paving the way for the coming of the Messiah (Jesus) just as the New Testament will pave the way for the second coming of Christ. Now I am in no way one of those radical Christians who get afraid that Jesus is coming real soon so people watch out. I am quite the contrary. I don’t see how God could be satisfied with 2,008 years after Christ’s death. I keep in mind that one day is like a thousand days to God. The Bible just foretells the second coming of Christ at a time that we don’t know.

I can understand why a group of people would debate over which books to choose. To use trickery and deceit I think it’s just human weakness. If the groups were of different beliefs I can see why they would debate and deceive eachother. They probably wanted to include the books that said what they wanted to hear. That behavior really does show how serious people took putting the Bible together. I don’t think that God encouraged their behavior. I just think that human weakness gets in the way but God still uses it for His purposes. There are leaders who fight over the Bible all the time. That is really stupid. You’d think it would be quite the opposite. That’s just so weird that people of the same religious groups can fight with eachother, even to the point of damage. But yeah, there could be many reasons on why deceit and debate could’ve taken place but not because God led it

Not that I’d change my belief but I like finding out what other people believe.

Wow! I’m impressed! You would venture that you won’t change your mind, even before you know what the other views are? Personally, I would never say that I refuse to change my mind. Since I’m always willing to understand and consider views other than my own, I always put myself in the position to learn. I would have to be either omniscient or reckless to claim certainty that no one else’s beliefs could possibly make more sense than the beliefs that I currently hold today! My hat’s off to you ;)

Do you believe in supernatural events or miracles? I think you can find evidence for them. If you could find evidence for a miracle what would be your thoughts?

I would love to find evidence for them but I haven’t yet. If I were convinced of a miracle, then I would reconsider my position on naturalism. If the miracle were shown to be performed by a god, then I would reconsider my position on theism. And if the miracle were shown to be performed by the God of the Bible, then I would reconsider my position on Christianity.

do you think it’s arrogant for the Calvinist to believe that salvation was only for a select few

I can see why you might consider the idea to be arrogant, and maybe it is – I’m not sure. Maybe the idea simply arose from the observation that it’s really tough to convince a rational person that the Christian story is true, and thereby bring them to salvation. It may be a rationalization that evolved to explain why everyone is not led to salvation by God’s Spirit.

the authors used words like all, whosoever, world, etc. He said that it was used figuratively. That’s weird.

That is definitely weird!

On the other hand, there are lots of verses in the Bible that most all sects of Christianity have to reinterpret in order to maintain their beliefs. Take the Trinity for example. I could list literally dozens of verses that show that Jesus and the Father are separate beings and cannot be aspects of the same being; verses that show that Jesus and the Father cannot be different forms of the same substance (like water and ice to use your example).

With Armeneans losing their salvation some will way that they were never really saved to begin with if they walk away from God…the Armenean worries about losing their salvation.

That may actually be just as problematic as predeterminism. If you believe that anyone who falls away was never saved in the first place, then no one can ever really know if they are saved now because one can know if he will change his beliefs down the road. Certainly those Christians who have fallen away from the faith would have never have imagined that it could possibly happen to them (at least not before they began to question). It means that you can’t know for sure right now that you are saved.

The Armenean will say that God foreknew that pharoah wasn’t going to choose Him and hardened his heart.

If God already knew that Pharaoh would harden his own heart (not “choose Him” as you say), then there would be no reason for God to harden Pharaoh’s heart. Yet Exodus says explicitly that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart. The only way hardening Pharaoh’s heart can make sense (at least from a literalist viewpoint – there is a way that it makes perfect sense from a textual criticism viewpoint!) is that God’s actions compromised Pharaoh’s free will. This may be another one of those examples where the verse must be reinterpreted in order not to contradict the belief that God does not interfere with free will.

I believe that God inspired men to put it together as we see it today whether it’s accurately translated or perfectly written because I see purpose in it.

When you say “inspired”, do you mean that God told the scribes exactly how copy the original text, and he told the translators how to translate the corrupted copies, and he also told the church leaders which books to put in the Bible together? If not, what exactly to you mean by “inspired”? Also, what is the purpose that you say you see in it?

If one believes that the original authors were inspired to write down exactly what they wrote (word for word), then why would God inspire others (the scribes who copied the originals, and later the translators) to change those words? Keep in mind that there are literally hundreds of thousands of variations to the original text (some estimate the number as high as 300,000 variations). Also, if the selection of books that went into the Bible was inspired, then why was it decided by debate and deceit? I know those are tough questions but I think they are important ones to consider.

My mother-in-law’s x-ray showed that she had breast cancer. Of course we prayed for her and she doesn’t have it anymore. Maybe the doctor’s made a mistake or God healed her. I’m not sure if she was supplementing. I’ll have to ask. I’m glad it worked out for gna. I guess she made a wise choice.

P.S. J.D. if you don’t mind me asking, what was your Baptist upbringing like? My whole side of the family are pretty much all non-christians, including my parents. I have no idea how I became one. I’m just interested in knowing what it’s like having a christian family and not believing what they believe.

I would NEVER participate in medical studies.

the side effects of prescription drugs has become the #4 killer in America.

PS if any of you know any one with cancer, tell them to start supplementing their diet with calcium. chemo only makes you sicker, kills good cells with the bad. Cancerous tissue cannot survive in an alkaline state. Increase your calcium intake, kill the cancer.
gma had only a few months to live, had started taking some supplements, dropped the chemo because she “would rather feel fine and die than be sick and in pain from chemo.” 6 moths later scan showed nothing. still supplementing. almost 2 years has passed is doing better than she was years before she ever got sick, does not even nap during the day anymore, “just not tired.”

I find it very fascinating to see what other people believe.. Not that I’d change my belief but I like finding out what other people believe. Do you believe in supernatural events or miracles? I think you can find evidence for them. If you could find evidence for a miracle what would be your thoughts?

Now about Calvinism vs Armeneanism do you think it’s arrogant for the Calvinist to believe that salvation was only for a select few? So far the Calvinist I’ve come across have been really nice. We just started attending this Christian Reformed Church. It was my husbands idea. They are all Calvinists and so far they’ve been nice. It is so boring though and there are a lot of old people. I don’t know if you have ever been in a church before but it’s like a Catholic service. It’s small which means I have to get mushy and gushy with them. The reason I have to go is because my husband and I made an ageement that he’d go to my church on Saturdays and I’d go to his on Sundays.

We were going to an Assemblies of God church and that’s the one I consider my church. They are Armeneans. Yes! The church has about 3,000 members which makes it hard to be mushy and gushy with people. The music is like a live concert and the pastor is hilarious. It’s fun but I think my husband thinks you’re not supposed to have fun at church.

I saw a document about the Calvinist faith. It caught my attention when this guy had explained why the authors used words like all, whosoever, world, etc. He said that it was used figuratively. That’s weird.

With John 3:16 How it says something like For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth shall not perish but have everlasting life. Calvinist will say that God gave the faith to certain people so whoever ends up believing are those that God gave the faith to.

With Armeneans losing their salvation some will way that they were never really saved to begin with if they walk away from God. There’s a scripture in the book of Luke that says (I’m paraphrasing) Not everyone who says to Me Lord, Lord will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Lord did we not cast out demons in Your name. Depart from Me you evil doers, I never knew you. So not everyone is truly saved. Also in I think the chapter before that it talks about the parable of the sower. Basically the Word of God is preached. Some receive it, some don’t and some do for a little while but the enemy takes it away.

I guess the Calvinist worries about truly being saved and the Armenean worries about losing their salvation.

God did harden pharoahs heart. The Calvinist will say that God is all sovereign and does things for His own purpose and glory. The Armenean will say that God foreknew that pharoah wasn’t going to choose Him and hardened his heart.

From a Calvinist perspective I see a Creator who has created everything to be as it is for His pleasure. From an Armenean perspective I see a loving Father who’s sovereign will was to give mankind a free will because who wants a bunch of robots loving you. I don’t know.

Calvinists and armeneast believe in the Trinity. Father (God(. Son (Jesus), , Holy Spirit
(Spirit) all in one. The best analogy that I’ve heard of is water. Liquid, ice, steam all are water.

I believe that God inspired men to put it together as we see it today whether it’s accurately translated or perfectly written because I see purpose in it.

That’s really thoughtful of you J.D. to show concern. Thank you! I appreciate it. I am taking Keppra and Lamictal for epilepsy or seizures. I’ve been on medication periodically since I was five so I am so totally anti-medication if I could avoid it. I’d be excited to reading what you have found.

Do doctors really make money off of the medicines they prescribe you? It wouldn’t suprise me if my doctor’s making money for the Keppra he prescribed me because it’s a fairly new medicine. I’m guessing like eight years old. My docotr is a really nice person, though. My doctor is so nice that He’ll do phone appointments with me because we live like two hours away from him. That’s cool.

There is actually another study that I could take part in. I would have to add another medicine to my dose. Great! I had no idea that people could take that much medication. My doctor said that he has a patient on four medicines. That’s psycho. I wonder how they even function. If I take part in this study it requires me to drink lots of water and I won’t know of course if it;s a placebo or not. Atleast the doctor’s will find out how honest I am unless the placebo is making me sicker. That would be interesting.

That is so retarded that medicines will pacify health conditions but later cause other problems and doctors aren’t big on nutrition or natural cures. Have you seen those commercials that come up with a new medicine and list all of the different side effects it can cause. That’s right you can pacify one problem and create a new one. No thanks. So yeah, I do like finding healthy ways of making health conditions better. Thanks again for being concerned.

Just a personal suggestion, I would try a more homeopathic route. I forgot what the meds were for. Let me know and I will try to dig out my book and let you know so you can try it.

It says to let your doc know that you are using the homeopathic meds. HE will probably discourage it because he will not be making any money on you once you find out it works.

I will go so far that 90% of the medical industry is a sham. Unless you are getting emergency treatment, you probably didn’t need it. The placebo effect if you will. also consider that most meds cause more harm than good, IMO, job security.

I’m glad you are becoming open to the idea of reading other material outside of apologetics (which, by its very definition, presumes that the Christian story is true and then looks for ways to support the belief – rather than looking at all evidence to see where the evidence points). In the mean time, Bruce is a classic author of apologetics so I’d say you made a good selection.

Regarding Arminianism and Calvinism, I think there are problems with either view. Calvinism teaches that salvation was for a select few. That is at odds with Joh 3:16 – Joh 3:16 states that whoever believes is saved, not just the select few. Other verses, like 2Co 5:15, say explicitly that Jesus died for all and (1Ti 2:4) wants all to be saved. Indeed 1Ti 4:10 says explicitly that God is the savior of all. See also 2Pe 3:9, Joh 3:16, Act 17:28.

Arminianism teaches that eternal life can be lost if one stops believing. Interestingly enough, that is also at odds with the Joh 3:16. Accoreding to Joh 3:16 (see also Joh 6:47, Act 16:31, 1Jo 5:12-13), if you believe, then you have (right now) eternal life. If you can lose your salvation when you stop believing, then “eternal life” was never eternal at all since it can be lost. Another problem with Arminianism is that it teaches that God never interfears with free will, but God “hardened Pharaoh’s heart” in Exodus and Jesus spoke in parables to prevent the Pharisees from believing and being saved (Mat 13:10-15).

There is also a problem with conditional election: if God knows the future (he’s omniscient), and he knew before he created the earth who would end up being saved, then he knew at the moment of creation who would be saved. Since he is omnipotent, he could have created the universe any way he wanted. When he chose to create the universe the way that he did, he was fully aware of the consequences of his choices, including who would end up accepting him and who would end up rejecting him. So he is responsible for deciding who would later comes to accept him because he made those choices and foresaw the results at creation.

It’s good that you recognize that both views, Arminianism and Calvinism, are supported in the Bible. Yet the two views are contradictory. That means that the supporting verses in the Bible are also contradictory. Regarding Hitler’s free will, I think you are right that the Arminianist view is less problematic. But it does not address other evils that humans suffer that does not involve free will – natural disasters like tsunamis, floods, earthquakes, disease, drought, famine, etc. It also doesn’t explain the evils that are commanded by God in the Old Testament. And verses like Pro 16:4 remain problematic: “The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.”

I don’t think you are “playing it safe” by believing as you might suppose that you are. You are considering that either there is no God, or that there is God as understood by Christianity. But what if there is a God and he is the God that is understood by Orthodox Judaism who considers belief in other Gods (including Jesus) to be blasphemy. Then you would have to reject Jesus and believe only in the God of the Hebrew Bible to have eternal life.

Sorry to hear about your meds. That really blows big time.

Just curious: you mentioned that even if the Bible indeed has defects, you would still believe that it is divine. Then what is it about the Bible (defects and all) that makes you think it is divine?

I think you’re right when you describe how religion can be comforting in stressful times. That seems to be true with all religions (Islam, Buddhism, etc.), wouldn’t you agree?