Well, those are interesting questions. And they were thought provoking, but here are the answers.
No, here are
your answers. Over time there have been many responses to the questions, and isn't it funny - nobody really agrees on anything.
Its been two thousand years since Jesus has performed a miracle in the flesh, what kind of evidence are you looking for? How could we possible find evidence of a man walking on water, a man being healed of leprosy, a blind man given sight? Its impossible to find evidence of that.
Impossible? With God, all things are possible. Why couldn't God make it possible for evidence to be left behind for us? In fact, wouldn't that make the case for God even stronger? "Wow! Nobody else but a divine being could have left evidence such as this so long after the fact! There's something special!"
See?
And as for the “anti-scientific nonsense”, do you think that an all powerful God would limit himself to our earthly physics and science? I sure don’t think so. If your friends were being chased by Egyptians and were about to be killed, wouldn’t you clear a dry path through a sea to help them escape if you could?
Yup, and I'd also leave behind mounds of evidence (because I can do that, you see).
I'd also help out those starving people I love so much. I like how you say that God helped his friends who were being chased by the Egyptians, but you say that God can't step in every time because man has sinned and all of that. They were still sinners back then, yet God sure was great at helping them out when they needed it. Somehow God doesn't seem to want to do such dramatic things anymore, does he? I wonder why that is.
God wasn’t promoting slavery, he was acknowledging that we, imperfect humans, had slaves (which was wrong, yes) so he set some guidelines for us.
Is that not implicitly encouraging it? "Don't do that! It's bad! But, well, if you're going to anyway, here are the rules..."
It is also very possible and likely that many passages in the bible have been skewed or lost in translation from the original Greek. The word “servant” could have been easily mistaken for “slave” in some places. How could that not happen while translating a book into different languages for thousands of years?
It's very possible.
So if you acknowledge that the Bible could be wrong about that, what's to say the Bible isn't wrong about much more important issues due to problems in translation?
Hmmm...looks like we have a bit of a problem.
Jesus doesn’t want us to eat his flesh and drink his blood literally. Its called Communion. The bread and the wine.It doesn’t actually turn into his blood and body like a few Christian denominations believe. It’s a metaphor that we use to remember his sacrifice.
Yes, yes, it's a metaphor
today. Do you not know the history of it? Try researching pagan religious practices. Back in the day, when Christianity needed new converts, they took on certain pagan traditions to make the pagans more comfortable with converting. Of course, the eating of flesh and drinking of blood became a "metaphor." Fun fact.
That also brings up some interesting points - you say it's a metaphor. How do you know? Who decides what's a metaphor in the Bible? When? Why? How? Some things were taken literally way back in the day - now we view them as metaphors. So how do we decide which is which?
God’s logic is totally foreign to us because we’re not perfect and we are not God. That’s why some of his ways seem strange.
If God's logic is foreign to us, how can you tell us what God even wants? How do
you know what God wants? Reading his book? What if he's tricking us with the book? After all, you don't know. He could be going by a completely different standard.
I think that sums it up.
Sums it up? No darling, you just brought on a whole slew of new questions.
