FlaSh iN tHe paN II

whY cHriStiAnitY?

In this post I want to take a look into some very hard subjects, they require thought and time to work through. I hope with that those who would take the time to read this would be prevoked to think through what they read and if what I say in here makes sense and choice they might need to make in response to what they read. with that said lets hit the road running...

There is no doubt that with what we hear from the world it is very hard to understand if there is really anyway that one can know anything for certain. We are told that everyone has truth within them and thus we must not squelch their “truth”. We are also told that we cannot trust history because it is tainted by the one writing it. Put this altogether alongside many other reasons people (very smart people) give for why one cannot know what is really true and thus, all are correct from any one point of view. This leads us to where we are right now in mass states of confusion, seeking for anything solid. Asking the question; “is there anything solid that I can sink my teeth into?” this is a hard question mainly because of the view that we have been trained which to look through. But, though all of this does represent where we are at in our world today I believe we can come to a solid point to which we can stand firmly. This is the purpose of the information which I include in this article. I do not want to make this seem simple when I know that there is a great deal of difficult barriers we must break through in order to come to the solid place to which I hope one can come to after reading this article, but I do think that when one is honest with ones self. Looks at information and facts with a unbiased eye you may not come to the conclusion I have, but I believe you will have to make a choice. Knowing that I caution you, if you wish not to have to make a choice and simply believe blindly what you do now then read no further. However, if you wish to make a choice for yourself what you think than I hope that you would read the following facts and thoughts with a critical eye and make your choice.

CAN WE TRUST CHRISTIANITY TO BE TRUE?
As we begin to look into the evidences for this thing we call ‘Christianity’ I believe that there are three main topics we must cover. In my opinion as one looks at these three aspects or topics of Christianity, one is left with one decision to make. That decision being, either you accept these as truths and live in the recognition of those truths, or you reject the evidence and live in recognition of that rejection of the evidence. There is no middle ground of accepting part or parts of these, there are simply two options: accept or reject. My prayer would be that you and whoever else reads this would come to the conclusion that I have: Christ, the Bible, and God are all real and reliable. In view of this, my life must represent that, in the way I talk, act, and believe. Let’s now look at the first of our three questions: Is there even a God? Or one True God?

IS THERE EVEN A GOD? OR ONE TRUE GOD?

INTELLIGENT DESIGN:
I first want to say, as we begin this we must both agree that if and when we do come across the truth we will admit it and live it. It does us no good to look for something and yet when one of us finds it, do nothing about it. I want to share a thought from a clever and yet extremely wise man named; Winston Churchill, he tells it this way: Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. Winston Churchill ...man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but usually manages to pick himself up, walk over or around it, and carry on. Winston S. Churchill, quoted in: Irving Klotz, Bending perception, a book review, Nature, 1996, Volume 379, p 412 (1). Let us not do this, if we find or simply stumble over the truth let’s do ourselves a favor and take a moment to understand it and then gather ourselves and from that moment on change the way we live in view of our new found truth. With that said let’s get this thing started of with another question. If a divine being does not exist and if we are all there is, we will be left with an answerable question: where do we get the morals that we seem to live by? What I mean is where did I or you get the idea that it was bad to kill a man in cold blood? Where did we get this strange idea that if I steal I am doing wrong? These are questions we must ask and answer if we are to answer the bigger question of is there a supremely Divine being.
One answer I have been told is that; “we simply get together and ‘reason’ our way to morals”, meaning that humans get together and decide what is wrong and what is right. If we accept this, then we have to ask where we got that ability to reason? There must be a cause or an effect if you will. Perhaps a designer?.
Let me give you an example that has been given to me which you may have heard before. I want you to take your nice watch, take it apart, throw it into a blender, come back in 70 years and tell me if your watch has put itself together and is working. Now as you hear this you may say “that is totally obscured, how could that ever happen!” Yet that that is the very thing we must believe in if we reject this person we call God, Jehovah. You see as any honest scientist will tell you as you look at the universe, even if you are not a believer in the God of the Bible, you must at least believe that there is some sort of designer to this universe. As we have come to discover, for every effect there is a cause. As we look at the world, the complexity of our bodies and minds, and the extent of the universe, we must ask; “where did I and all of this come from?” As many non-Christian scientists are beginning to admit, the complexity of the universe strongly indicates an intelligent designer as being the cause. But - if there has to be an intelligent designer who is it? In other words how can we know that it is the God of the bible? For the answer to this we must delve into our next topic to tackle, the reliability of the Bible as being the Word of God.

THE RELIABILITY OF SCRIPTURE:
Now, as we go into this next question I hope to answer both this and the previous. The reason we must go into the reliability of the Bible is because this topic and the existence of God are completely linked. You see, if the Bible is true then what it says about God and what He has done has to be true. Much like in a house of cards when you remove one card and the whole thing collapses, so it is with each one of these three basic topics we are talking about. If one is proven wrong than we must rethink the whole of our beliefs. However, with that knowledge I am sitting here typing to you with great conviction and peace about these very things. This in no way proves what I am about to share with you. However, it does I hope show you a little of it’s reliability. If I were uncertain of these things I would not share them with you, for fear that I would be found to be wrong and more importantly that what I believe and hold to is wrong.
Now, about that thing we call the Bible, can we trust it as infallible? To answer this we must go to some of the evidences for the bible: i.e. fulfilled prophecy, the uniqueness, and the testimony of history.

THE UNIQUENESS OF THE BIBLE:
The internal evidence test reveals the Bible's amazing consistency. The Bible was written by over 40 authors, in 3 languages, on 3 continents, over a span of 1,500 years, and covers hundreds of controversial subjects. Yet, the authors all spoke with agreement; there are no contradictions. And the few supposed contradictions that are brought up (that are worth the time to refute) are easily cleared up with an understanding of the original text, or reading and correctly understanding the context. (my wife and I in our studies have come across an extensive list of the supposed contradictions in the Bible, and as we have gone through the list we have seen this to be true.) Also, from Genesis to Revelation, there is one unfolding story--God's redemption of mankind through His Son Jesus. The supposed contradictions in Scripture are just that - supposed. As one honestly evaluates the many supports for the bible and honestly looks at these supposed contradictions we find they are in most cases brought to us out of ignorance, or in some cases, a deep desire to get rid of something that could and does convict people of wrong.

FULFILLED PROPHECY:
The external and internal evidence tests do not prove the Bible's inspiration, but do reveal that the objective evidence is consistent with and supports the Bible's claims to be a divine book (because any book from God that claims to be inerrant should be reliable and consistent with itself). As Carla and I have studied other so-called divinely inspired books such as the Book of Mormon, the Jehovah Witness’ Bible, the Qu’ran, and Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, to name a few, it became clear very quickly that these books were humanly written and could not possibly be from God.
For example, the Book of Mormon holds a great deal plagiarism taken from the King James Bible, and includes an identical translation mistake that was first made in the King James Version. (There are many books on the subject, one that we have used and that is very extensive on the study of other religions is “The Kingdom of the Cults” by Walter Martin).
Getting back to biblical prophecy, there are hundreds of specific prophecies in the Bible which have been literally fulfilled - in many cases they are fulfilled centuries after the completion of the Bible. Any attempt to late-date these prophecies is impossible--there is a copy of every Old Testament book but one from before 150 BC, and hundreds of these prophecies were not fulfilled until years later. For a detailed discussion of this area, see the book “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” by Josh McDowell. [Also see attached file “fulfilled prophecy” for specific fulfilled prophecies.]
Norman Geisler explains Ezekiel's prediction that the city of Tyre "would be destroyed and its ruins cast into the sea (26:2)”. In the past this prophecy provoked much scoffing, because when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Tyre, he left the ruins right where they fell--on the land. However, 200 years later, Alexander the Great attacked Tyre and the inhabitants withdrew to an island just off the coast for safety. In order to reach them, Alexander threw all of the debris, stones, timbers, dust, and everything else, into the sea to build a causeway that would reach the island." [6] If events so far in the future can be accurately predicted, certainly the events of the past have been accurately recorded!

THE TESTIMONY OF HISTORY:
External evidence from both archaeology and non-Christian writers confirms that the Bible--both Old and New Testaments--is a trustworthy historical document. Archaeologist Joseph Free has said that "Archaeology has confirmed countless passages which had been rejected by critics as unhistorical or contrary to known facts." Renowned Jewish archaeologist Nelson Gluek confidently said that "It...may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible." Christian apologist Josh McDowell tells us that "After personally trying to shatter the historicity and validity of the Scriptures, I have come to the conclusion that they are historically trustworthy." Some scholars once said that Moses couldn't have written the first five books of the Bible (as the Bible says) because writing was largely unknown in his day. However, years later archaeology proved otherwise by the discovery of many other written codes of the period: the code of Hammurabi (ca. 1700 B.C.), the Lipit-Ishtar code (ca. 1860), and the Laws of Eshnunna (ca. 1950 B.C.). Critics used to say that the biblical description of the Hittite Empire was wrong because the Hittite Empire (they thought) didn't even exist! Then - archaeologists unearthed the Hittite capital in 1906 and discovered that the Hittite's were actually a very vast and prominent civilization. Archaeological and linguistic evidence is increasingly pointing to a sixth-century B.C. date for the book of Daniel, in spite of the many critics who attempt to late-date Daniel and make it a prophecy after the detailed events it predicts. (Most of this info found in A Ready Defense by Josh McDowell, and is an excellent book to read for a detailed overview of proofs for scripture, historical and archaeological evidence, evidence for Jesus being the Son of God, and some answers to difficult questions people ask such as, “Why does God allow evil?” and “Can the Bible be proved scientifically?”.

CONCLUSION:
With all this information that we have just looked at, and after the detailed study that I have done, there is in my opinion one conclusion we can and must come to: God and His Word are true, and thus must be followed and believed. You see as you begin to stack up all these evidences you begin to see that there is something supernatural to all of this. I for one cannot believe that all of the above evidence can come to no certain conclusion.
I will now try to tie up the above and the first question we asked (is there a God and if so is it or does it have to be the God we read about in the Bible). I believe that as we look at those testimonies, fulfilled prophecies and the uniqueness of Scripture we come to know that there is an all knowing supreme being and it is the God of the Bible. it is true, beyond all critics and attacks it is true! When we look into the Bible to see what is said about God or the possibility of more than one god, many verses such as Deuteronomy 6:4, John 1:1-2, Exodus 20: 1-3, Isaiah 43:3, 1 Corinthians 8:4, and Ephesians 4:6 state clearly that there is only one true God.
As I have looked at the many evidences for God and the Bible, I have come away with these conclusions; there is an intelligent designer and the Bible is truth. With this we went to the above verses and discovered some of what Scripture had to say about who that intelligent designer was and is. As one looks at those verses it becomes clear there is no room for any other god other than the one true God of the Bible. We know this from the many evidences for the Bible, showing it is reliability.
Now as I said before this is all much like a house of cards, however, I may have been a little off as I said that. In a way, yes these two and the next factor that I want to look at are like a house of cards in that they are interlinked, or building upon each other. However, they are not even as close to being as flimsy as a house of cards. As we have looked at the evidences for these, and upon further and more in depth study, I believe we have and will discover an indestructible house of cards. Or, if you will, we have uncovered the house of cards to be in fact a house of solid stone carved over time and with great care.

Sites you may want to check out
Regarding fulfilled prophecy
http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml
http://www.bprc.org/topics/fulfill.html
http://100prophecies.org/
also see Acts 1:16; 2:16-21; 3:18, 21-24
If I don’t get time to cover the deity of Jesus and the truth of who he was (the third aspect I wanted to cover), hear are some sources concerning this.
http://www.greatcom.org/resources/areadydefense/default.htm
See specifically chapters 17-22. (This site holds the majority of the book, A Ready Defense.)
Also, these books address much of the topics we’ve been studying as well.
Anderson, J.N.D. Christianity: The Witness of History. London, England. Tyndale Press. 1969.
Habermas, Gary R. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ.
Joplin, MO. College Press. 1996. (Church of Christ)
Montgomery, John Warwick. History and Christianity. Minneapolis, MN.
Bethany House Publishers. 1964.
Montgomery, John Warwick. Where is History Going? Grand Rapids, MI.
Zondervan Publishing House. 1969.
Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Grand Rapids, MI. Zondervan Publishing House. 1998.

a WoRk in ProGreSs

Disclaimer: This by far is the longest post I have done. However, this is something that I have been working on and wanted to share it with any of you who read from my blog.


Why Not Believe? Reasons Why Atheists Don't Believe in God/gods by. Austine Cline

"My tHouGhtS"by. Nathan B. Anderson

Multiple Gods and Religious Traditions:
It is difficult to credit any one religion as being True or any one god as being True when there have been so many throughout human history. None appears to have any greater claim to being more credible or reliable than any other. Why Christianity and not Judaism? Why Islam and not Hinduism? Why monotheism and not polytheism? Every position has had its defenders, all as ardent as those in other traditions. They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong.

mY ThouGhtS
This question I have heard given among Atheists before, there is too much information to be sure your making the right decision so you must not decide.
I pose this question or illustration. Have any of you ever been to any restaurant before? As I am sure I may assume, all of us have at some point been to a restaurant before. Now I don't know about you but there are times when I go to MacDonald's and have to sit there for five or more minutes before I can make the choice of what I want to eat. Now this time frame of decision making is lengthened when I take my wife out to eat at nicer restaurant. I wish to make the right choice, but there are just so many things that look so very delicious I feel almost crippled by the prospect. My point is that even though there are many things that look so very good and the decision seems overwhelming, (depending on where you go it may be easier), I still want and have to make a choice because if I do not then I would starve. The body must have food at some point, (now some of us may give it too much food but that is a whole other topic), the issue is, the body needs nourishment - it desires it - and there muse be a decision made to feed or not feed that desire even though there are endless possibilities as what we could use to give our bodies that nourishment. There must be a choice made! To say that I will not decide because there are too many things to choose from is simply a cop out. Decide what you want, but donÂ’t deny the fact that one must choose. There is a need and desire for something within us to have a god/gods. Why do you think there are so many religions in the world today? The last thing I want to point out to the reader is, Not making a choice is still making a choice! There is no getting around it!

Contradictory Characteristics in Gods:
Theists often claim that their gods are perfect beings; they describe gods, however, in contradictory and incoherent ways. Numerous characteristics are attributed to their gods, some of which are impossible and some combinations of which are impossible. As described, it's unlikely or impossible for these gods to exist. This doesn't mean that no god could possibly exist, just that the ones theists claim to believe in don't.

My tHouGhtS
There are a great number of gods to which have very contradictory characteristics the religion or belief of what the god or gods are telling the believers. They say serve me and find peace and yet they say to fight for them. This can be a contradiction or a contextual problem. What I mean by that is that it might depend on the context for which each statement was made. This is also some what of a straw man theory meaning, I donÂ’t want to believe and this is why. ItÂ’s setting up something easy to knock over, knocking it over and saying: see itÂ’s not true because I created an argument and then defended it. There must be an honest look given to the truth of the argument and the reason for why the argument was given. I believe as Austine Cline does that there are many, perhaps even almost all gods that are very contradictory and thus one would have a hard time being honest and believing in them. But to say that all are untrustworthy I believe is a statement made from lack of honest investigation. And thus not a good reason to disbelieve that there is any God at all.

Religion is Self-Contradictory:
No religion is perfectly consistent when it comes to doctrines, ideas, and history. Every ideology, philosophy, and cultural tradition has inconsistencies and contradictions, so this shouldn't be surprising — but other ideologies and traditions aren't alleged to be divinely created or divinely sanctioned systems for following the wishes of a god. The state of religion in the world today is more consistent with the premise that they are man-made institutions.

mY ThouGhtS
Yes, I agree all religions are contradictory to themselves and have in some cases little to no cohesiveness to them. This also as he states is a reflection of man made ideologies that are not divinely originated. However, this proves and shows nothing more than there are a lot of self-seeking people in the world trying to create a religion that serves their personal purposes. Atheists, Muslims, Jehovah's witnesses, Mormons, Hindus, Christendom etc... are no exception. But, I do not believe this excuses someone from the responsibility to choose. There is a choice to be made and must be made. I have chosen what I think both the facts and my heart supports. If I were to sit down with you I would tell you, you were wrong for believing in any other god or thing than what I do (and I believe I am right in doing so). My point is that you and I have a decision to be made and no matter what skewed facts are presented, we still have that choice to make.
I should say that I believe that Christianity is not a religion. I base that on; religions are based upon or derive from man's attempts to describe who or what God or god's are or are not. Christianity is a faith that comes from a belief in what and who Christ and God are and how they have revealed themselves to the world. This is what we call Christianity, it is not man trying to describe God or god's it is THE one and only God revealing Himself to humanity through Christ. That is what I think the facts reveal, but whether you agree or not, I simply hope that you would critically look at the information that we have with an honest eye. Also that you would not use this lame excuse in order to try and alleviate yourself from the responsibility and judgment that comes from having to choose - choosing and owning up to that choice.

Gods Are Too Similar to Believers:
A few cultures, like ancient Greece, have postulated gods which appear to be as natural as human beings, but in general gods are supernatural. This means that they are fundamentally different from human beings or anything on earth. Despite this, however, theists consistently describe their gods in ways that make the supernatural appear almost mundane. Gods share so many characteristics with humans that it has been argued that gods were made in the image of man.

mY ThouGhtS
This assumes that this is a bad thing. I know that the argument is that since the God/gods are given human traits and thus dumbed down. The God/gods cannot then be a superior being. One question in return must be asked, how do you suppose to describe a superior being who you/we do not think like, act like, or fully comprehend? See if He/they are indeed superior to us then how could we describe them? There must be some pictures and attributes that we give to this being in order for us to understand who or what we are dealing with. This in return creates a human characteristic to the God/gods that are being described. For instance in the case of an atheist, their god is the knowledge and reasoning to which they proved (supposedly) that there was no superior god to them and the knowledge to which they have. Simply their godÂ’s are themselves. So the Theist is simply trying to put a handle on things to which they/we do not understand.

Gods Just Don't Matter:
Theism means believing in the existence of at least one god, not that one necessarily cares much about any gods. In practice, though, theists typically place a great deal of importance on their god and insist that it and what it wants are the most important things a person can be concerned with. Depending upon the nature of a god, however, this isn't necessarily true. It's not obvious that the existence or desires of gods should matter to us.

mY ThouGhtS
Simply said, you had better be right. If you are wrong than you will regret it for the rest of,…well,…who knows how long! I do know one God (the True God in my opinion) who made it matter whether you believe in Him or not. The God of the Bible says that if you believe in Him, than you will live with Him for all eternity. But, if you reject Him you will spend an eternity away from Him in eternal punishment. I'd say that matters.

Gods and Believers Behave Immorally:
In most religions, gods are supposed to be the source of all morality. For most believers, their religion represents an institution for promoting perfect morality. In reality, though, religions are responsible for widespread immorality and gods have characteristics or histories which make them worse than the most-vile human serial killer. No one would tolerate such behavior on the part of a person, but when with a god it all becomes laudable — even an example to follow.

mY ThouGhtS
This is purely opinion-based reasoning. He thinks that certain things done by any one God or gods are supposedly immoral and so they cannot exist. First question I would have for anyone who makes this argument is this; to what standard are you holding this God, and where did you get this idea that what He does is immoral?
My first question in response to this argument is: How do you arrive at determining a specified moral standard to which you are measuring the actions of a god or a believer against?
To the second statement I would say, yes believers do behave immorally and yes they sin and screw up. However, they know they have broken a moral code based on what their God has told them to do or not to do. Where did you get this thought that they are immoral? Also, because some of the Dallas Cowboys, or the Minnesota Vikings have been known to behave immorally, this does not give anyone the right to say that the team does not exist. These same teams have codes of conduct that each player is to adhere to when they are with the Dallas Cowboys, or the Minnesota Vikings. However, these players still deviated from that standard, they are still part of the team, and those teams are never-the-less real with or without the adherence of the personnel. Whether a follower lives perfectly or immorally has zero bearing on whether God exists or not. That argument has very little weight and should not be presented as a solid reason to not believe there is a God/gods.

Evil in the World:
Closely associated with taking action that should be considered immoral is the fact that there is so much evil in the world today. If there are any gods, why don't they act to eliminate it? The absence of substantive action against evil would be consistent with the existence of evil or at least indifferent gods, which is not impossible, but few people believe in such gods. Most claim that their gods are loving and powerful; the suffering on Earth makes their existence implausible.

mY ThouGhtS
Do want to be eliminated? Do you want to be killed and be no more? Because that is what it would take to rid the earth of evil. You may ask the question; where does evil come from? To this you need look no further than your own person. Think about what goes on in your head's…do think about just punching your boss or that annoying guy at work, want to lie to get that big promotion, have an affair, or steal? Just think in your head what have you thought about in the last day? I am sure if we are honest one of the above or something similar would have run through our minds. We are evil to our very core, we are the reason there is evil in the world, and thus the only way to get rid of evil is to kill us. Do you want that?

The question has been posed will there be evil in Heaven? and will there be free choice in Heaven?
These are great questions. So, will there be evil in Heaven? I believe there will not be and cannot be evial in Heaven. I believe that Scripture would support this and show it to be true. So, will there be free choice in Heaven? This is a harder question, and I am sure to whatever answer I give there will be some point that it exploited. However, I am going to do my best with the knowledge and ability I have. First of all I do not pretend to understand all of who God is and what He does, this can sound like a copout answer if it does so be it. I am only telling the truth His ways are not my ways and His thoughts are not my thoughts. However, here is my answer. I believe that in Heaven there will be no imperfection, no evil, no sin. I believe as Scripture says that when we get to Heaven we receive a new body, one not tarnished by sin, and that we will have the choice to worship God or not, but I ask myself if I am in the presence of the most Beautiful, Awesome, Powerful, all-knowing, all-powerful, Perfect, Supreme, Holy, Good, Righteous, Infinite, Just, Sovereign, Patient, Wise, Truthful, and Loving Being would not find total satisfaction and peace in worship of Him? My answer is yes. Yours may or may not be.

Faith is Unreliable:
A common characteristic of both theism and religion is their reliance on faith: belief in the existence of god and in the truth of religious doctrines is neither founded upon nor defended by logic, reason, evidence, or science. Instead, people are supposed to have faith in a position they wouldn't consciously adopt with just about any other issue. Faith, though, is an unreliable guide to reality or means for acquiring knowledge.

mY ThouGhtS
This supposes that the thing to which you are to have faith in is unreliable. Also that you cannot have faith and be a logical, reasoning, scientific individual. That would suppose that what you believe goes against science, logic and reason. This argument would then fall apart if evidence could be given to show that which faith has been placed in, is indeed reasoned to be logically scientific and thus not only a faith but a fact. To this I would recommend a person read as much as they can on the order that is the universe, and investigate as much as they can into true science. Also one might want to read such works as; Evidence That Demands a Verdict, A Ready Defense, and More Evidence That Demands a Verdict. These are works by a man named Josh McDowell. You might also read such works as The Case For Christ, The Case For a Creator, The Case For Faith, which are all works of Lee Strobel, a former newspaper writer. You may also look at Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis.

Life is Material, not Supernatural:
Most religions say that life is much more than the flesh and matter we see around us. In addition, there is supposed to be some sort of spiritual or supernatural realm behind it all and that our "true selves" is spiritual, not material. All evidence, though, points to life being a purely natural phenomenon. All evidence indicates that who we really are in our selves is material and dependent upon the workings of the brain. If this is so, religious and theistic doctrines are wrong.

mY ThouGhtS
For my response to Austine's statement I go to a much smarter and wiser man than I, Professor Peter Kreeft, off the website: www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth28.html. He states: "The strongest positive argument against life after death is the observation of spirit at the mercy of matter. We see no more mental life when the brain dies. Even when it is alive, a blow to the head impairs thought. Consciousness seems related to matter as the light of a candle to the candle: once the fuel is used up, the light goes out. The body and its nervous system seem like the fuel, the cause; and immaterial activity, consciousness, seems like the effect. Remove the cause and you remove the effect. Consciousness, in other words, seems to be an epiphenomenon, an effect but not a cause, like the heat generated by the electricity running along a wire to an appliance, or the exhaust fumes from an engine's tailpipe. What does the observed dependence of mind upon matter prove, if not the mortality of the soul? Wait. First, just what do we observe? We observe the physical manifestations of consciousness (e.g. speech) cease when the body dies. We do not observe the spirit cease to exist, because we do not observe the spirit at all, only its manifestations in the body. Observations of the body do not decide whether that body is an instrument of an independent spirit which continues to exist after its body-instrument dies, or whether the body is the cause of a dependent spirit which dies when its cause dies. Both hypotheses account for the observed facts. When a body is paralyzed, the mind and will are still operative, though deprived of expression. Bodily death may be simply total paralysis. When you take a microphone away from a speaker, he can no longer be heard by the audience. But he is still a speaker. Body could be the soul's microphone. The dependence of soul on a body may be somewhat like the dependence of a ship on a dry-dock. Ships are not built on the open sea, but on dry-dock; but once they leave the dry-dock, they do not sink but become free floating ships. The body may be the soul's dry-dock, or (an even better metaphor) the soul's womb, and its death may be the soul's emergence from its womb. What about the analogy of the candle? Even in the analogy, the light does not go out; it goes up. It is still traveling through space, observable from other planets. It 'goes out' as a child goes out to play; it is liberated. But what of the need for a brain to think? The brain may not be the cause of thought but the stopping down, the 'reducing valve' for thought, as Bergson, James and Huxley suppose: an organ of forgetting rather than remembering, eliminating from the total field of consciousness all that serves no present purpose. Thus when the brain dies, more rather than less consciousness occurs: the floodgates come down. This would account for the familiar fact that dying people remember the whole of their past life in an instant with intense clarity, detail, and understanding.
In short, the evidence, even the empirical evidence, seems at least as compatible with soul immortality as with soul-mortality."


There is No Good Reason to Bother Believing:
Perhaps the most basic reason for not believing in any gods is the absence of good reasons for doing so. The above are decent reasons for not believing and for questioning and eventually leaving whatever theistic and religious beliefs a person might have had in the past. Once a person gets beyond the bias in favor of belief, though, they may realize something critical: the burden of support lies with those claiming that belief is rational and/or necessary. Believers fail to meet this burden, though, and thus fail to provide good reasons to accept their claims. As a consequence, those who don't already believe and/or who are not biased in favor of belief aren't given a reason to start. Since the burden of support lies first and foremost with those making the positive the claim's the theistic, religious believers. Non-believers don't need reasons not to believe. They may help, but they aren't particularly necessary. Instead, what is required are reasons to believe. The question "Why don't you believe?" is a request for justification from the nonbeliever; the response "I haven't seen any good reason to bother believing" returns the need for justification back where it belongs: with the believer. Too often, believers fail to realize that their position is the one needing defense and this may help them understand that. Theists should think of a god they don't believe in and ask why they don't believe in it.

mY ThouGhts (Work in Progress)
The reason I don't believe in Buddha; I don't believe in Buddha because he died, he also did not come back from death thus he no longer has anything to say to me. The reason I don't believe in many of the gods or the people who have been set up as gods such as Buddha, is they are no longer alive and in most cases some of their claims cannot be shown to be facts (such as the earth sitting on the back of a turtle that swims in the cosmic "the universe"). They have been proven to be scientifically inaccurate, and they call for a self focus, and as I mentioned earlier I am not a good person. And I don't trust myself to become enlightened or some of word for reaching a higher consciousness. Those are some very simple and quick reasons I do not believe in these gods/god or persons.

Austine then says:
Some may answer that their religion teaches them not to. Others, however, will respond in a way similar to the above — they have no reason to bother and/or they have good reasons to think that that god does not or cannot exist. Well, atheists don't believe for the same sorts of reasons — they just don't make an exception for the theist's god. Theists and atheists aren't always so far apart; more important is the methodology used to arrive at those conclusions. Why does the theist disbelieve in all other gods except for the one or few in their belief system?

mY ThouGhtS
This is a good question, I believe that if one was to honestly ask this question, whether you already believed or not, you could really discover some things about yourself and about God (the One True God). Why? Because this would or should cause honest investigation into the truth or reliability of what we believe. Now why do I believe what I do? This for me is very easy, because Christianity is fact! Now that's my simple answer. In a more in-depth answer I believe what I do because it can be backed by science and logic. Rather logic and science point to what I believe!
I CHOOSE to believe in the God of the Bible, thus I admit freely that my thoughts will come from that angle, however, I do not admit that my belief in God comes from an illogical or uninformed point of view.

I wish that I could come up with some argument or proposition that would convince all I talk to. The reality is that my arguments and propositions will be fallible and have holes just like everyone else's. I make mistakes and am not perfect.
Reality is that all of us have at some point in life made a choice as to what we think is true, and since that point we have been formulating and compiling more information that supports that information. All I wish to do is talk about what I believe the world we live in supports.

No Title and No PurPOSE

I started my internship this last week as I am sure you have read on the blog that's updated by Carla and not me. She does a far superior job at keeping you all up-to-date. So anyway...I hope you enjoy my one post for this month. Because that is about my average.

I have been enjoying my internship (for the two weeks i've been doing it) I am finding it hard to know exactly what I need to do with each day. Not that there is a shortage of things for me to do, but that I am just struggling with where my priorities should be within those projects and tasks.

I am however, enjoying my time to read and study. Sometimes I feel guilty because I am doing now for work what I used to do for fun!

well, that is about all your going to get out of me this time...until next month.

Snakis