Sorry. I don’t believe in Walking Snakes, Talking Donkeys, or Pregnant Virgins

Evangelical Christian:

Gary, I challenge you to read the book Luke and see the claims that the Lord Jesus Christ made. If you are willing to do His will He will show you the truth of salvation. Your unbelief has no basis. It is abhorrent that you would call Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot, cruel ungodly men, better than God. Oh, Jesus Christ actually suffered the wrath of God, dying for sin in our place. As an infinite God/Man he did so. If you believe on Him you will be saved. As of now you walk according to the Prince of the Power of the air, spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience. The reason you don’t believe is that you cannot submit to the true and living God. In fact you rant and rave. Someday, He will judge the living and the dead. Your unbelief and bias is subjective. Because you find something odious or horrible does not negate the objective truth that is found in the Bible.

Here is a little something you might want to read about the truth of the resurrection of Christ.

History is His-Story

Christians believe in Jesus Christ and know that He lives today. They also believe the Bible. They trust what is recorded in sacred Scripture. They trust in the Savior and His atoning work for their redemption at Calvary. But what about those who can not believe or choose not to believe that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead? They might believe that Jesus existed – that He was a good person, a teacher, or a prophet, but they just can’t believe that He died and was raised to life. What can you tell your non-believing friends that will persuade them that Jesus did die and was raised to life so that they can trust in Him with their life? There is actual evidence that trusting in Christ is more than a hope-so faith but a know-so faith.
Expert Evidence

More secular or non-Christian historians have written about Jesus Christ than any other single person in human history. It is no fluke that historians have long focused on the God-man Jesus Christ who is the single, most influential person of all time. He had more impact on the world than did the most powerful human leaders and dictators ever dreamed of. Many of these men have come and gone and have left little influence on the world around them.

Simon Greenleaf (1783-1853) was and still is known as the greatest expert in judicial testimony ever. This America attorney wrote a book called, “Testimony of the Evangelists” in which he recounts the hundreds of eye-witness accounts of Jesus’ life, His ministry, His death, and His resurrection. He views these recorded testimonies in the New Testament as lines of evidence that would hold up in a court of law even today. This is important because there is no statue of limitations on murder. Part of Greenleaf’s evidence included the thousands and thousands of martyrdoms, the global spread of Christianity, and a persistent-through-persecution faith that millions of believers have died for as proof that this God-man and His ministry was no fake. As has been stated, many people would live for a lie, but few would be willing to die for one, yet millions over the years have died for a faith that they believe in to the uttermost.

Read more: http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/historical-evidence-of-jesus-christs-resurrection/#ixzz3fomWtuWk

Gary:

My dear friend, you are following the teachings of scientifically ignorant, middle-eastern, Bronze Age goat-herders. You live in the modern, educated, 21st century. Educated people should NOT believe in:

-walking/talking snakes that tempt women to eat forbidden fruit.
-donkeys that talk.
-virgins being impregnated by ghosts.
-human beings walking on water.
-dead people walking out of their graves to eat broiled fish with their former fishing buddies.

All this is ignorant, superstitious nonsense. You have no proof that any of it is true other than to quote an ancient, middle-eastern holy book that is riddled with scientific and historical errors. The Bible, the Koran, the Hindu Scriptures: all superstitious, ignorant nonsense concocted by scientifically-ignorant peoples as a means to make sense of a scary, dangerous world.

Wake up friend. You have been sold a wagon-load of snake oil.

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “Sorry. I don’t believe in Walking Snakes, Talking Donkeys, or Pregnant Virgins

  1. But belief that everything you know, see, hear, taste, feel, smell, sense in every manner possible including matter you cannot not sense came from absolutely nothing, out of nothing, from no-where, going no-where, is a completely logical scientific assumption. We developed 2 eyes over billions or trillions of years because we had a necessity for stereoscopic vision which we would not know existed without the ability to see in the first place and one eye wouldn't have been enough. Same with the ears and hearing because mono simply is good enough, hands, feet, etc. Gary it's easier to believe a donkey could be made to talk than for me to believe the universe and life as we know it just plopped into existence with absolutely no cause, no reason and no matter.

    Like

  2. Dear Fred,

    Why is “a god did it” always the fall back answer to any mystery that man hasn't figured out?

    Floods: “The Rain god did it.”
    Droughts: “The Sun god did it.”
    Lightning: “The Sky god did it.”
    Source of the universe: “The universe god did it.”

    People in Benjamin Franklin's day were furious with him for telling them that lightning was NOT the result of a god's foul temper. Humans seem to have a long history of attributed unexplainable natural events to “gods”.

    Let's study the issue in question, using the scientific method, before attributing the source of the universe to a god. We may find out, ONCE AGAIN, that a god is not responsible.

    Like

  3. Why must we study the issues using your system of faith (science) and not my system of faith (Christianity)? Why must I accept the assertion that your faith in science MUST always be used to measure the justification for my faith in Christ? I have a question Gary. Convince me to switch to your side, tell me what I will gain by de-converting and taking placing my trust/faith in man-made scientific methodology. Let us say I am completely wrong and you are 100% correct, Jesus is dead, He rotted and blew a way in a dust cloud years ago when little Miriam opened up a clay box she found in a cave. Paul was a delusional narcissistic schizophrenic psychotic nut-job and Christianity is absolutely fake, fraudulent and a total fairytale.

    Let us say science is absolutely 100% correct and we did actually evolve and all that jazz. What do I gain by leaving a faith that provides me comfort, peace, an reason to love and care about those whom if it were not for this faith I would not love or care about? What do I gain by abandoning hope in life after death which brings me some comfort and/or peace and can make the fact of our impending deaths even a tiny bit more tolerable? Why should I give that up to join the pews of cold scientific intellectualism which tends to provide more questions than answers?

    Like

  4. But I believe Christianity is the truth just as you believe science is the truth. Only difference is I also have peace, comfort and God-forbid when I am at the bedside or grave of someone I love who is dying or has died I also have hope. I don't care how stupid, silly, ignorant, backwoods, redneck, unintellectual that hope is in the eyes of science, it provides me something science and man could NEVER ever provide. What do you have at the bedside or grave of those you love who are dying or dead? Truth?

    Like

  5. Which do you find easier to accept:

    God made a donkey talk or made it appear a donkey talked. Vs The universe came from nothing

    A snake talked (thought snake or serpent is descriptive language and not necessarily literal) vs evolution decided we need 2 eyes, 2 ears, 2 hands, 2 feet, 10 fingers, ten toes but only one penis.

    A virgin becoming pregnant by act of God vs Man evolved from a monkey over a period of billions of years for absolutely no reason at all. We “progressed” from ape to something better even though there is no reason to believe being a human is better than being an ape.

    God walking on water vs God not being able to walk on water

    Dead people rising from the dead at the command of the God who created them vs Relying upon the reason of man to explain the unreasonable plausibility for life at all. If it is logical and sane to believe life comes from nothing for no reason at all then why is it not reasonable to believe life can return for no reason or cause at all? Besides, let us say a man rose from the dead today on live TV, do you think you would change your mind at all? No, you wouldn't, you'd explain it away with science. In the end it doesn't matter, we have Moses and the Prophets; let us hear them. If we do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, we will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.

    Like

  6. If your belief system provides comfort for you, great! However, in western civilization, including in the United States, claims of fact are determined by the scientific method, not faith. One can appeal to faith as a basis for belief, but not as a basis of fact.

    Imagine a bridge builder who builds bridges based on faith that “God” will hold up the bridge, regardless of how he constructs the bridge. Not good enough.

    We respect “faith” for personal beliefs, but not for establishing facts upon which society should function.

    If your faith gives you peace, all power to you. But I prefer the cold hard truth. I prefer scientific truth over an emotional (spiritual) security blanket that I know has no evidence to verify that it is actually true.

    Like

  7. Fred,

    I strongly encourage you to read a book on Evolution. Evolution does not teach that humans evolved from monkeys. I think you would find the reading fascinating and maybe even enlightening.

    Like

  8. I have read about it and I won't ever again since I found it insanely ridiculous. Yes I know about hominids v. primates, say hi to piltdown man for me. Oh wait..

    Like

  9. Gary: One can appeal to faith as a basis for belief, but not as a basis of fact.

    Me: Science does exactly that all the time. Why is it that when science appeals to faith in science it is suddenly “fact”?

    Gary: Imagine a bridge builder who builds bridges based on faith that “God” will hold up the bridge, regardless of how he constructs the bridge. Not good enough.

    Me: Imagine a watch builder who bought all the parts to build a watch and put them in a room expecting it would build itself. Not good enough unless you believe in evolution, actually the watch builder has a better chance for the watch building itself since he at least provides the parts and an environment for them to exist in. Evolution provides neither, just the results of.

    Gary: We respect “faith” for personal beliefs, but not for establishing facts upon which society should function.

    Me: Who's facts does society agree to accept? Yours alone? Why must I concede and submit to your faith?

    Gary: I prefer scientific truth over an emotional (spiritual) security blanket that I know has no evidence to verify that it is actually true.

    Me: According to science what is truth this week? I prefer Biblical truth over man-made scientific hypothesis.

    Like

  10. You are certainly welcome to your beliefs, Fred, but our culture has chosen to view reality and the world through the perspective of the scientific method. Wrong or right, that is just the way it is. It isn't my view only, it is our culture's accepted norm of interacting with the world as it is.

    Every decade our culture moves further and further away from a religion based world view to a science based world view. It is my personal opinion, that we are much better off for it.

    Like

  11. Wow, this is some frantically specious … “reasoning” I guess … on your part. You simply assert with no justification other than your faith in modernity that 1st century people are somehow less trustworthy or believable than 21st. And again you fall back to “no proof any of it is true.” I don't know what you mean by “proof” but if you mean evidence there is plenty.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s