Why do people get offended over Christianity?

[Orr v'emet]

First off an empty tomb is not really evidence of a miracle. Particularly 2000 years after the supposed fact. Secondly we don't really know where the tomb is. There is a site that proclaims itself to be the site of the tomb but its authenticity is questionable. After the disciples dispersed there was no veneration of the tomb. Thus it was only later claims that designate the tomb as that of Jesus.

In fact there is no direct contemporary evidence that Jesus existed as a person. This of course is not evidence that he was not a real figure. But it complicates the matters immeasurably. Simply put there is no direct evidence supporting the story of the crucifixtian. There is no verifiable evidence of the authenticity of his tomb. And there is no evidence that he existed.

Before the flames start I am not claiming he did not exist. I am merely responding to the question of why an empty tomb is insufficient evidence to support the divinity of the individual.

The miracles are there whether you choose to believe them or not. Just like God's existance isn't dependent on your belief that He exists (or doesn't). My feeling is that in all the searching, you have heardened your heart against it and your more set on proving that He doesn't exist then trying to consider that He does. My prayer for you is that God would soften your heart to His work in the world around you. God bless you as you continue to search for the Truth that ultimately can only be found in the Father.

[Az_]

The miracles are there whether you choose to believe them or not. Just like God's existance isn't dependent on your belief that He exists (or doesn't). My feeling is that in all the searching, you have heardened your heart against it and your more set on proving that He doesn't exist then trying to consider that He does. My prayer for you is that God would soften your heart to His work in the world around you. God bless you as you continue to search for the Truth that ultimately can only be found in the Father.

Of course. Things happen whether you believe them or not. This is a two way street. What you believe to be a miracle does not necissarily make it a miracle. It may be that you merely misunderstand some aspect of it. The truth is independent of our beliefs. Sometimes our beliefs turn out to be right. Sometimes they turn out to be wrong.

I can only tell you that I have not hardened my heart. I do not seak to prove there is no god. I merely seek the truth (see my signature below). To me it is a question of believing something you want to be true versus accepting what you can acertain to be true to a reasonable degree. If this damns me then I cannot help it for this is simply who I am.

In seeking the truth I hold to whatever I find it to be. If my quest leads me to god's door then so be it. If that is the truth then certainly I have a lot of questions but I will accept the truth. If the truth leads to a naturalistic universe then again, so be it. I will accept the truth. If the truth leads to small blue smurfs controling everything.... well ok, that truth I may fight.

[Orr v'emet]

Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it. -Andre Gide

I did note your quote Az. Too me, it sets you up for a fall. It's essentially saying that no truth exists which in turn hardens your heart to finding the truth. I pray with all my heart that your "quest" leads you to God's heart, and soon! BTW, there is a key element to a relationship with God and that's faith which is trusting in things that you cannot see! God Bless!

[Az_]

I did note your quote Az. Too me, it sets you up for a fall. It's essentially saying that no truth exists which in turn hardens your heart to finding the truth. I pray with all my heart that your "quest" leads you to God's heart, and soon! BTW, there is a key element to a relationship with God and that's faith which is trusting in things that you cannot see! God Bless!

Do you doubt that a Muslem believes with any less ardour their particular teachings than you do? Do you think a Jew puts any less faith in their doctrine then you? They have faith. Heaps of it. And yet you would suggest their faith is misplaced. I would ask you how to avoid their mistake.

There are many things that I cannot see that I accept to be real. I don't have to see something to accept it. I just need to have some means of determining that it is real.

If god exists and has some effect on this universe it necissarily follows that what god acts on behaves in a manner other than what nature would suggest it should. Thus god's actions should be recognisable. I have yet to see any evidence that the universe acts in the way we recognise it should. I trust that if god wishes me to find my way to him he would surely provide a path for skeptics such as myself as he does for believers such as you.

I appreciate your concern as I understand it to be kind hearted. But remember as you see my views as mistaken I too may see your views as erronious and I too am not without compassion. I too hope for the best for you.

[georgesbluegirl]

Christians occasionally forget that they are not the ONLY ones proclaiming that theirs is the ONLY way.

Az, I get what you're saying. Your arguments (some of which are similar to my beliefs) provoke some excellent reflection and, hopefully, discussion.

[Orr v'emet]

Christians occasionally forget that they are not the ONLY ones proclaiming that theirs is the ONLY way.

This christian hasn't forgotten this but this christian also believes the bible when it says that Jesus is The Way, The Truth and The Life.

Az,

Thank you for being kind in your posting. I do hear you and understand very much what you are saying. I could post some site to refer you to that could tell you about all the archeological discoveries made that are consistant with the bible and so on and so on, yet I feel that you would argue a way out of it and that's fine.

What I know is that God exists. I have no doubt. I have been in His presence, communicated with Him, received instruction, discipline and encouragement from the Word. I have a realationship with Him that is not just some "religion" or "denomination". It's something that goes deeper than anything I could imagine, it's an amazing awareness that He is everywhere I look. It's a committment to God that I am willing to build my life around and die for if I'm ever called to.

God bless!

[apothanein kerdos]

Cos we're sick and tired of you shoving your beliefs down our throats and then telling us your the only ones that are right when there is no evidence for your beliefs.

This is actually a blanket statement that requires validation. It is impossible to say that for any religion or belief there is no evidence. All religions or belief hold some form of evidence. However we must determine if this evidence is of good quality, reputable, and the interpretation of the evidence is correct. Thus, when examining Christianity from a skeptical view point, one cannot say, "There is no evidence" but instead must say, "After reviewing the evidence for Christianity it does not stack up." From seeing your comment, I'm assuming you haven't read the evidence for Christianity...I will bring it up during some of the objections that have been listed.

As for cramming it down people's throats, I admit, some Christians can be a bit too forward in their approach. They are zealous without tact. However, the mentality that Christians hold is actually a moral one. Let me use a murder case from the 1960's as an example.

In New York, in the 1960's, a woman was chased and stabbed to death over the course of 30 minutes at about 3am. 38 people witnessed this event occur, yet no one called the police until after she was already dead. The main excuse was, "I didn't want to get involved".

From the Christian perspective, we are watching people being murdered by their own sin and thus trying to rescue them. It is simply the moral thing to do. Even if we are wrong, we are under the moral obligation to try and save someone for what we believe to be wrong.

Something isn't real because you can't prove its not otherwise I can say pixies are real and because theres no proof they aren't they must be.

Well absolutely. Just because there is an absense of something doesn't mean that it's present (an arguement too many Christians fall into). However there are evidences for God.

1. A misconception that once you become a Christian your living becomes unblemished.

2. Knowing Christians who are so good and spiritual on Sunday, but rest of the week live as they please in the world.

3. My brother-in law specifically was offended when he attended a young people's meeting. Instead of being part of the meeting, being a first time attendee he became the focus of the meeting.

4. Being told how to interpret the Bible.

5. Having your homelife interrupted by a doorknocker whether it be Jehovah Witness or any other organization.

Oh excelent points!

Christianity makes use of the most aggressive and pervasive forms of propogation. It doesn't just hold itself to family or communities. It attempts to spread itself to anyone it can get its hands on. It particularly targets children. For those that do not accept their particular doctrine this can be a highly threatening thing. Imagine how you would feel if I attempted to teach your children about atheism and humanist values.

It would be my hope that any Christian here would teach their children about atheism and humanism. I think it is essential as a Christian to study other religions from a very young age.

Christianity is simply put the most overall aggressive religion in the world. This does not mean violent (although violence has been used). It merely means that it pushes in places that other religions do not. It not only insists that it has the truth but that others have to accept that truth. To those not in the fold it is very very aggressive.

Well absolutely, I hope we're agressive. However you haven't shown the negative implications of this. From a humanistic standpoint it could possibly be presupposed as negative, however this terminology to most Christians is a compliment.

The thing of it is that it is not out of malice that it is this way. It is leveraging of love and compassion that enables this aggressive nature. But once you have disconnected identity from the body its fairly simple to turn love and compassion into tools of such aggression.

It is possible for Christians to become over agressive. However, I don't think you see the hypocricy in your underlying message. What you seem to be asserting (a non-Christian on a Christian message board, which is your performance contradiction on this post) is that Christianity should be passive like other religions. However, this is religious intolerance for the key to our faith is to spread what we know to everyone. It is the entire purpose behind becomming a Christian. Thus if we are to teach true religious tolerance then we must be allowing for Christians to spread their faith.

I will stand in agreement with you though that Christians, specifically teenagers, are too agressive. I admire their zealout attitudes but shun the way in which they pursue it. Too many Christians are ready to go and not enough are willing to be patient. I suscribe more to the relational form of evangelism; of evangelising your friends instead of going up to complete strangers and sharing the Gospel.

Salvation is a specific quality of Christianity(or more generally the Abrahamic religions). Of course damnation in the absense of salvation is also a particular quality of Christianity. Its sort of like saying believe in me and I won't hit you. There aren't you glad you were saved? Of course its me that you are being saved from in the first place. Not all religions are worried about a hereafter or believe in damnation.

If I am correct, I believe Islam and certain sects of Judaism are the only other religions that teach of damnation. However, I think you've misunderstood the misapplication of this by the modern church and what the Bible teaches. What you state is true as far as application goes. So many Christians use this method of, "Well, are you willing to risk it?" They use Pascal's Wager to the extreme. Yet this is not a biblical way to witness to people. When we read the Bible we see that hell is merely mentioned as a consequence and never as a tool for witnessing. It's very straightforward. Instead, it is God's love that is to be at the forefront. God doesn't use hell as a reason to accept Him. He simply mentions hell to show us the consequence of choosing to live in our sin rather than accept His love.

Could you clarify this notion of denial of self. Are you suggesting that one attempt to lose one's own identity? Or are you saying one should deny the baser material desires.

We should lose the desire for material items. When we say we die unto ourselves, we are asking God to kill our sin nature and for Jesus to take control of who we are.

I cannot change what I believe out of a dishonest attempt to save my hide from an eternity of suffering.

I applaud you for that. While I wish you would come to a loving understanding of God, I think it is pleasent that you haven't accepted Christ based soley upon fear of the afterlife. A person who does this is accepting Christ for selfish reasons. The entire purpose behind accepting Christ is to be non-selfish, to give Him the glory.

The only thing I have not done is found anything to convince me that a god exists.

You might be interested in JP Holding (if you haven't already read his works). If you are interested, I can link you to his website. The reason I say this is that he takes more of a philosophical view to Christianity that might explain some things a bit more for you.

In fact there is no direct contemporary evidence that Jesus existed as a person. This of course is not evidence that he was not a real figure. But it complicates the matters immeasurably. Simply put there is no direct evidence supporting the story of the crucifixtian. There is no verifiable evidence of the authenticity of his tomb. And there is no evidence that he existed.

Actually, you're wrong. We can read in the works of Flavius Josephus, Tacitus, Thallas Circa, Pliny the Younger, Lucian, and others, about Jesus the man, events surrounding the death of Christ, and even confirms events listed in the New Testament. Thus, from historical evidence we cannot conclude if Jesus was the Messiah or not, or if the New Testement is valid or not, however we can conclude that Jesus did in fact live and die.

Before the flames start I am not claiming he did not exist.

Come now, you said yourself that we can conclude he did not exsist. This invites evidence to be brought forth

If god exists and has some effect on this universe it necissarily follows that what god acts on behaves in a manner other than what nature would suggest it should. Thus god's actions should be recognisable.

I have another site I'd like to link you to with your permission. It's more scientific and factual than philosophical, however it proves through science (and multiple articles) that the Universe had a creator. Now, whether this is the Judaic-Christian God we believe in cannot be proven through science, however it lends itself to a more narrow debate.