I'm still having an ongoing discussion with a friend who is a Bible/Christianity apologist, here's my latest response...
I'm so sorry it took so long to respond. I wasn't ignoring your last response, but dealing with my maid of honor duties in Arkansas. And yeah, I had to break down your message before I replied. :-)
Regarding Lee Strobel, one book written is not going to
prove that another book is correct. If the author truly
uncovered evidence that proves the case for Christianity,
why isn't it front page news? Why haven't more people
converted? He may have found a logical reason to become a
Christian, but I doubt that his logic is will persuade
me. And I will definitely look into the book(s). (My
current reading list is about 5 feet high).
My friend claimed to have witnessed a woman's club foot healed only with the power of prayer.
Regarding the woman with the club foot, Seeing is
believing. I'm sure you witnessed something very
interesting, but where's the proof of the miracle? Where
are the doctor's records of the woman's foot and the
testimonies that there is nothing medicine/science could
do to help her? Again, it's another instance where the
only people around to witness the miracle are those who
are most likely to believe in miracles or immediately associate prayer as the only logical cause of the event.
Regarding the plagues in Egypt, again stories from the
bible probably come from true history, but the "spins"
come from the victors. The mention of the plagues in the
Bible helps confirm that they probably actually happened.
However, the Bible says the cause was supernatural when
we know what causes disease and the spread of it today.
The Bible says the red sea was parted, the red sea's
existences doesn't prove the story.
People back then didn't understand why everything
happened so they attributed large scale events to an
angry deity. This isn't saying that people were
completely ignorant to innovation and science, but the
masses pretty much believed whatever was fed to them. I'm
sure the leaders found it very useful that the people
believed that the god(S) wanted them to do what they were
told or suffer a wrath of some kind.
It's more believable that natural events happened and
were falsely attributed to a supernatural cause. Again,
I'm not saying there isn't a god, but I seriously doubt
Regarding the Corinthians passage, What were the women in
the church saying that they were being told to keep
quiet? And by issuing this statement once, they created a
precedence for keeping women quiet. By silencing one
group it leads to the idea that any person creating a
conflict from within is to be treated as a problem rather
than addressing the issue that started the situation.
She said in her last letter:
"Does that mean divorce and pre-marital sex aren't
necessarily "sinful" anymore? No, but they don't carry
the same weight of consequences as they used to in those
Again, we moved on. We know now that divorce and pre-
marital sex aren't that horrible. Even if your husband up
and left, he'd be a bad guy. But in any time and place,
that does not justify killing. And that includes Biblical
I said having sex before marriage shouldn't be considered such a horrible thing. She said my idea of practice makes perfect shouldn't mean I can justify sex before marriage.
Regarding pre-marital sex as practice makes perfect,
that's not what I was saying. I'm saying that there are
people who cannot find certain things as a turn on. And
if you have certain things in common to get
excited, it helps. For example, I like to experiment a little,
but it helps if I can find a guy who
likes to be the dominant one in bed. Some guys only like
to be submissive. They find it very difficult to become
aroused if they have to play a different role and usually
don't want to participate in anything different at all. Finding that
out about a guy before I decide to spend the rest of my
life with him is a good thing.
Regarding keeping the old law vs. Jesus's new laws, he
did say to keep the commandments holy though. And then he
added a whole new slew of concepts to keep in mind. One
of them being that no matter how bad you are, you'll be
forgiven. That kind of leaves me feeling upset. There are
so many "born-agains" who do horrible things, then decide
that through repentance, they can be "saved." This
basically means that I can go out and kill thousands of
people, but in the end, if I'm really truly sorry, and I
ask forgiveness, I still get to go to Heaven. This again
screams that the stories were made up so people would
feel like they had a chance for some chance at happiness
in a make-believe after life. An after life we have no
proof of as well.
Although those passages on the pork still seem relevant
even today. And today I rescued a baby duck, now I have
to worry about bird flu! (just kidding!) ;-)
Regarding God having unconditional love, it still seems
like a fairy tale story that no matter what, no matter
how bad we are, no matter how bad we're feeling, there's
a father figure in the sky looking over us. It's more
believable that the bible is not the inspired word of
god, but the writings meant to comfort and guide people.
But with time, things change. We should ditch our
security blanket and instead aspire to do good without
the fear of consequence or the promise of reward. Our
morals should be guided by common sense, logic, reason,
and a desire to make the world we live in a better place.
The Bible basically gives people the idea that by doing
good, they will be rewarded. Doesn't sound like a good
source of morality to me.