Please there must be a God or not, why is there always 2 parties...

Please there must be a God or not, why is there always 2 parties, one saying that they "believe" they do and the other one saying that they "disbelieve" that there is one. Why isn't there ultimate proof which discredits one over the other? There's always SOMETHING which counters either party and you don't see the whole truth. It's either it is or it isn't. It's so masked, why the hell does it have to be masked?!

Attached: muaäsken.jpg (412x351, 19.44K)

Other urls found in this thread:

berenddeboer.net/sab/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I think I'm turning insane, is it all just a material world or is there more to it than that?!!?!

Because whatever evidence present has to have some assembly of believability, and for the "disbelievers" the concept of God is unbelievable. They always find ways to rationalize their rebellion, just to justify in indulging their most harden desires.
Even demons know more about God than us, yet they don't really serve Him.

...

But the atheists have a higher IQ level and they have disproved the Bible, mainly that the Bible itself is contradictory

where and how?


and if I said my IQ was higher than yours, does this in turn mean that I am always correct, and you are incorrect?

Anyone can show contradictions in a false, modern translation. KJV is translated without error.

B-but the smarter people usually tend to be correct


What's so different about KJV and the other ones

/thread/

You are a liar, the KJV purposely subverts Christ's ban on re-marriage, and robs St. Mary of Her Grace.


The KJV is an Anglo-Saxon translation of the Holy Scriptures that has some minute, but important subversions to justify England's religious break with Rome.

There have been, and still are today, plenty of genius level IQ people who believe in God, and even specifically in Christianity. Read about Anthony Flew (or read his book) for an atheist, a very influential one, in fact, one who influenced all the "new atheists" that are around today, who toward the end of his life decided the arguments in favor of God were too strong to reject and became a deist (not a Christian). For a really intelligent, and scientist, Christian that's contemporary read Wolfgang Smith. For really, and I mean REALLY, advanced apologetics read Cornelius Van Til.

I'm ignoring you; you're not saved.

Need I go on? Who are you gonna trust, some faggotty moral relativist narcissistic neckbeards, or Your Father in Heaven?

"If I have spoken evil, give testimony of the evil; but if well, why strikest thou me?"

As a True man and True God once put it.

But the the theory to enslave the Earth by Jews using this system of beliefs, the susceptibility of the Abrahamic religions by other humans to weaken societies…

If Christianity weakened societies, the West wouldn't have survived for an extra 2,000 years after Christ lived, died, and rose again. And this is assuming it dies, to begin with.

Christianity frees the bond of slavery; the circumcision of the body has been elevated to the circumcision of the heart. The only true Jew, is the Man who loves God with all His Heart, by the grace of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

But if Christianity is the real religion why isn't everyone a Christian?

Good question, why aren't you a Christian? If you aren't, then you should be able to answer. If you are, then you must know because Christ is King, and He gives Grace and Mercy to whom He will.

I'm divided in two

I'm going too deep but I can't pick a side, the material world or the immaterial

I might be turning insane I don't know

user, this is a theological thread, not comedy hour.

See a psychologist.

I've already been to one they don't help

Attached: spiritual-blindness.jpg (402x600, 26.19K)

winnie the pooh what is wrong with me

No, they haven't:
berenddeboer.net/sab/

The psychologist's diagnosis was that I had PTSD, ADHD, anxiety and depression. I don't see anything unusual though so I can't have schizophrenia which correlates with religious delusions. This doesn't make sense to me.

I mean, was I rambling?

Ummm sorry

user you need to calm down.

But how, how do you all do it

Even if there was the other party would disbelieve it. That's just how it is.

Anyone looking this up will easliy find this anecdote themselves but worth bearing in mind that if you really want to look into Van Til, his work is known to be very difficult and incomprehensible, and Greg Bahnsen as his student is considered to be the person to read on him and his apologetics, with writings on it that are apparently somewhat comprehensible (not that I've read either but Bahnsen is on a long reading list of mine)

There isn’t, and if there is a God that makes humans logical, makes the universe perfectly describable by materialistic means, and then demands you ignore the logic and reality he created and believe something you cannot experimentally validate or else you go to hell is counterproductive. It’s why the mind of God must be unknowable but greater than yours in Christianity- because if you held God to even middle school standards of logic, this universe and the notion of the plot Christianity proclaims become wholly incompatible things, and Christians cannot logically defend it unless the day it lasts all according to keikaku

And OP, people will phsychologically believe what they want to believe, not objectively based on what the evidence says or where the arguemtns take them. We all rationalise what we instinctly want to believe and find reasons to support it. We fool ourselves each and everyone of us into thinking we're rational. Ofc, as Christians we think there is good evidence and sound arguments, but these clearly are not good enough for non-believers who have looked into it.

And it is not our doing by which we've come to accept Jesus, it is only by the grace of God, that is to say, a gift from him, that our eyes have been opened to see. He has not opened the eyes of non-believers, but we believers are not special because God has chosen us, as in, we haven't recived the sight on merit of good works we've done which non believers have not done. No, we're merely on the receiving end of mercy.

We have no right to boast, and had God not opened our eyes we would be just as dismissive and skeptical of the solid evidence and sound reasoning that lies behind our faith as the non-believers, left in the dark as they are, where they're happy to put themselves and anything other than God first in their lives. We as believers are just as bad, and the same in different ways, I'll concede, but we acknowledge God, repent, weep for our sins, TRUELY know good and it's foundation and have hope and rest in Him as our ultimate foundation of our lives and reality, who is perfect and all good, powerful, just etc. etc.

Fag

Ultimately nothing is provable, people tend to believe whatever makes them feel good.