"As I said before, there is eyewitness evidence of of the life,
and Resurrection of Jesus.
A LOT of citations please.
Not only Christ followers but recorded by other nations, Romans, Egyptians, Jewish and others. All of who were not Christ friendly so they had no reason to intentionally further Christ' commission. Eyewitness evidence of the miracles performed and recorded by them and not only followers of Christ. Written documentation that would be admissible in court. Eyewitness accounts.
You can have faith in science as evidence but your faith may change just as science does.
I can't convince you to believe anything other than that what you believe,
Wrong! Wrong! WRONG! This is where the tehists are so blinded by their own belief that they think that everyone is just like them. Unlike theists, I can provide a wide and long list of the types of things that would convince me to change my views on the God hypothesis. Can a theist provide the same list? No, because to do so would be a blasphemey because it would be admitting that there might not be a god and/or a holy spirit. With science, you HOPE to be proven wrong or at least have your ideas clarified or improved eventually.
even though what you believe is just a Theory/ Hypothesis.
What do I believe?
As I mentioned, If you don't believe what I believe, then surely don't believe what you have been believing, all because the name of Science (always changing).
I don't understand this sentence.
As you MUST KNOW Science is not the end all.
Who said it was?
Science has not answered many questions, just as SCIENCE hasn't answered the question "HOW did WE get HERE?.
True. Science has not answered many questions. However, he seems to be saying "And since it can't answer all questions it is valueless." What he fails to admit here is that science has answered almost infinitely more questions (taken as a percentage) than any religion ever has.
Remember Science once said that the earth was flat,
This is one of the most disingenuous arguments I have ever seen. From my bloog at http://www.galileogallery.com/2009/03/galileo-gallery-launches.html
On 15 February 1990, in a speech delivered at the Sapienza University of Rome, Cardinal Ratzinger (later to become the current Pope, Benedict XVI), quoted the philosopher Paul Feyerabend as saying “The Church at the time of Galileo kept much more closely to reason than did Galileo himself, and she took into consideration the ethical and social consequences of Galileo's teaching too. Her verdict against Galileo was rational and just and the revision of this verdict can be justified only on the grounds of what is politically opportune.” He added, "It would be foolish to construct an impulsive apologetic on the basis of such views.”
Think about that for a second.
In the year 1990 – the year when the Hubble Space Telescope was launched aboard Space Shuttle Discovery – a highly-placed Cardinal who later become Pope 1) indicated that the Church’s actions against Galileo were “rational and just,” 2) seemed to think that it was a GOOD thing that the church considered not only the evidence of facts of heliocentrism but also “the ethical and social consequences of Galileo's teaching too,” and 3) said that it would be “foolish” to apologize for the church’s actions merely because it was “politically opportune” to do so.
Your brother's straw man argument is pathetic. No scientist claims that science is 100% rigth all the time. If it doidn't change and get updated all the time, something would be wrong.
and boy were some scientist who got their pride hurt when they had to admit that they were wrong.
As my above history shows, it was the SCIENTISTS who were PUT TO DEATH BY CHRISTIANS for claiming that the world was round and not the center of the universe. Your brother either doesn't know history or is being intellectually dishonest for Jesus.
Foolish pride, I've been there, as most of us have.
It is obvious he has.
You talk about books that were supposedly meant to be included in the bible, how do you know that?
If someone claimed that an article that they wrote is suppose to be included in the next TV Guide and this writer doesn't even work for TV Guide, should they be allowed to have it printed?, obviously not. Same deal, not just any text was allowed.
So he approves of the system that the church used to detarmine which books should be in the bible? Then he shoudl agree with the methods that they used to decide to kill millions of jews and witches during the same time?
If you are communicating with one of the so called (ex-Christians)
He speaks of pride and then says this as if anyoen whowas RALLY a Christian would never become non christian. What a hypocritical asshole.
can you ask them where they stand on tough issues such as Killing babies, Homosexual marriage/ Sodomy and other liberal stances.
1) Atheists are not liberal as a rule. I know many very conservative atheists.
2) My views on the issues he raised
a) Killing babies is bad.
b) Restricting the grant of state sponsored benefits on people because of the sexual orrientation is just as wrong as doing so because of the color fo their skin.
c) I have no opinion on sodomy other than to say I enjoy blow jobs.
Their answer will reveal if they were ever a true follower of Christ.
No, they won't.
The name or term Christian is more of a label anymore. Catholics and many Mormons call themselves Christians.
This is what cult members sound like when they are starting into that final phase when their leaders sarts culling the herd by identifying "flase" believers. Next comes the compounds then the mass suicides.
Please send me a list of all of the unbiased sources who prove that Jesus Christ never walked the earth.
1) Why should bias have anything to do with proof. If a bias source PROVES something (to whatever standard of evidence we are trying to acheive) , then it is PROVEN (to yhat extent).
2) I don't care if a guy named Jesus walked the earth and told everyone to be nice to each other. I do care that he didn't perform miracles and he was not the son of a sky god.
There you have it. Anyone care to dissect it? I know, I know, it's pretty monotonous to do so all the time, but humor yourself.