Evidence for Christianity

[garee]

5 minutes ago, Starise said:

You may be aware of the DNA argument that says chimps share 98% of our DNA.

How would you answer that one?

LOL I see your 98%  of 12  and raise it to 100%  and dismiss the trial jury .

God creates after kinds. 100% human kind  . nothing fishy about that kind or a barrel of monkeys  

[Starise]

5 minutes ago, garee said:

LOL I see your 98%  of 12  and raise it to 100%  and dismiss the trial jury .

God creates after kinds. 100% human kind  . nothing fishy about that kind or a barrel of monkeys  

I agree. Can we give an answer that would satisfy a scientist who believes we came from monkeys though? This is a strong argument for them as to what they see as a progression.

Exhibit A- Monkeys resemble men in some rudimentary ways.

Exhibit B- We share 98% of their DNA.

[FJK]

40 minutes ago, Starise said:

I agree. Can we give an answer that would satisfy a scientist who believes we came from monkeys though? This is a strong argument for them as to what they see as a progression.

Exhibit A- Monkeys resemble men in some rudimentary ways.

Exhibit B- We share 98% of their DNA.

We also share about 60% of banana DNA.

That doesn't make us a plant.

[Starise]

48 minutes ago, FJK said:

We also share about 60% of banana DNA.

That doesn't make us a plant.

This is true that we share DNA with many other creatures. My reasoning for it was always that God simply, "used some of the same stuff" in His creations.

A very common thing for atheists to do is to make a statement assumed to be factual that isn't. Since they are well aware very few of us can break down DNA in a lab, they assume we can't argue it. In fact, most of them know nothing about it either, so it's an argument based on them betting it's all over our heads. Whenever we get into a subject that can't be proven one way or another, they fully leverage that argument in their favor.

The truth of the matter is, even those who work with DNA daily will tell you they still know very little about the complexity of DNA, that is, if they are honest. They work with the things they do know and have even figured out how to splice genes in a lab. That's how we get trees that glow and mice that can grow a human ear.

What they can't do though is show a definite connection or progression of DNA from an ape to a man, and they never will because it didn't happen.

[Who me]

21 hours ago, Starise said:

Oftentimes many of these credentialed people will construct a wall of intellectual gobbeldy gook that looks sort of believable to the layman, but in reality none of it adds up, so they try to find ways to discredit the other side

 

Not just the ' credible " this tactic is used by many online atheists and a knowledge of the sites I've  quoted and of many others, helps as they have encountered the ' smokescreen ' arguments and have responses. 

We are told to be wise and to be inocent, we don't  have to constantly  reinvent the wheel, when talking about our faith.

The questions, challenges etc posed by atheists are not new and they have been answered many many times through out history.

 

We just need to read them. 

[Who me]

21 hours ago, garee said:

One has to present the gospel it is the power of God , we show what he requires. He does the work of teaching.

Listening to testimonies I have heard again and again how someone came to Christ.

Often it is a long drawn out process, no two testimonies are the same, yet there are common features.

Atheists going from rejecting the bible as fairy tales, to learning about its historical accuracy, to starting to read it, not to pick apart but out of interest and coming to an understanding of who the bible shows Jesus to be.

 

Yes we ha e to present  Jesus, but is there only one way of doing that?

Can we not talk about the historical facts a out Jesus?

Can we not challenge there views about the resurrection?

Or can we only quote parrot fashion what the bible says? 

[Starise]

3 hours ago, Who me said:

 

Not just the ' credible " this tactic is used by many online atheists and a knowledge of the sites I've  quoted and of many others, helps as they have encountered the ' smokescreen ' arguments and have responses. 

We are told to be wise and to be inocent, we don't  have to constantly  reinvent the wheel, when talking about our faith.

The questions, challenges etc posed by atheists are not new and they have been answered many many times through out history.

 

We just need to read them. 

Leaning back on another references can look like a weakness.  I have been accused that I can't think for myself, so I most often use the answers that are biblical and my own brain. I am a branch , not the vine and the vine guides me just fine.

They want you to argue the points they contstruct, and discount our points using the same quasi scientific half wit ideas they use to come up with evolution.

They will listen to 'their people', but won't consider the opinions of professionals and scientists who happen to be believers. To be fair I have listened to and analyzed 'their people' and the only strength they have is lying in numbers. The more often you repeat a lie the more apt people are to believe it, especially if the lie comes from different cherry picked sources. A few of them will throw up a question mark and simply leave it as a question mark rather than asking themselves, " Could it be God?"

It's no secret they are after the minds of the young to get them to buy into this world view, both in the lower grades and especially in college. They know how naive' many of them are, who are willing to accept whatever the professor says. This is why we have young adults graduating college thinking their Christian parents are nitwits.

Their arguments against the bible seem very convincing until you break it down. The trick is to get them ( young adults) to realize they are viewing it through a carefully orchestrated lense. The devil is expert at taking something, like a bible verse or story and twisting into something unrecognizeable, just like our modern press.

True investigation requires looking at all of the angles and being truly objective. When we have Harvard University endorsing an ape man based on a pig tooth, something is wrong.

[com7fy8]

I find that God proves himself.

And humans in our effort to prove God are fallible.

And most of all our attention needs to be to how God has us living His word.

Ones who argue the Bible can have ways of keeping attention away from what matters the most of God's word. So, in case they come to believe certain things they were arguing about, still they could be not true converts to Jesus, but only changed to beliefs.

God is personal, not only a matter of information.

And ones do not want to submit to Him.

So, I might communicate with people about what they are arguing, but I am mainly concerned about if they are personally sharing with Jesus and growing in Him. And if they aren't, whether they are atheists or claim to be Christians, what is the real reason??

[Starise]

4 minutes ago, com7fy8 said:

So, I might communicate with people about what they are arguing, but I am mainly concerned about if they are personally sharing with Jesus and growing in Him. And if they aren't, whether they are atheists or claim to be Christians, what is the real reason??

Yes, and I am reminded the battle we fight is the invisible spiritual battle. These invisible soldiers have managed to convince or stall many many people. Doesn't really matter which way it is, since both result in hellfire, and that's their goal because they are just kicking the can of their defeat down the road for as long as they can. They know where they are going and would love to have some company to torture.

[Who me]

On 8/23/2023 at 12:50 PM, garee said:

One has to present the gospel it is the power of God , we show what he requires. He does the work of teaching.

So you never talk about church  comment on the news, on matters of morality, all you do is talk about work and quote the scriptures.

Or do you give a Christian view on the news, morality etc etc.

Why not add to that the facts about the accuracy and reliability of the bible.