P.S. What are the weird symbols in your comment "What are any of us doing?" I see those hear and there on the Web.

LOL, James. They're good pot lucks but
(who without a changed heart) makes that choice?

I agree with you that God must be a part of the seeking process, but who is to say that He is not here in this blog right now?

Why not here? Why not now?

Yes, it makes a lot of sense to me. You appear to be where I was just a few months ago. My best friend since I was 4 yrs old is an atheist so, like you, I count myself inclusive, and the two of us don't tiptoe around each other. See us discuss the major tenets of Christianity.

As I said, that observation was meant to provoke, the response is obvious, but why go to church and listen to THAT music. Where else do you go that you listen to someone speak for 30 minutes uninterrupted with no visual aids (usually). It's insane, unless your heart has been changed. The pot lucks alone could ruin the best intentions.

If you're surrounded by people who are mostly not Christian, you must be a college student or be trying hard to do so. According to Gallup about 3/4 Americans fly the Christian flag, so we have a statistical anomaly (or college).

You've made a "chair is a chair" choice in choosing the resurrection. For something to be true it must be falsifiable and I don't know any self-respecting Christian who would not agree that Christianity is false if the resurrection is false.

One last thought, the resurrection (or hoax) may be the biggest tipping point in history. If a hoax, why did that small group of weak believers change the world?

Thanks for the clarification aljoizer. I would offer a simple idea:

If Christianity isn't real, what are all those people doing? Like you, I mean this only to provoke, but doesn't it make you wonder. And, if you please, throw out people who go to church and do whatever because they were raised that way. What about those who are sincere, we've all met some, and clearly love what they're doing?

I met one of these sincere, committed, serene people in college. One of them made such an impression on me (that there was another way to live) that I just returned to visit him after not seeing him in 27 years to thank him. Why? Because I never forgot how attractive his life was to me and It was part of what eventually led me back to Christ.

My advice to the seeker here is to limit the discussion, at least what you hear, to real stories of people at various point in the journey that include what really happened to them whether atheist or Christian. I've noticed that there is a real difference between "actual undeniability" and "philosophical proof".

We can debate whether that is a glass in front of us philosophically but we all, in actuality, know that it is a glass. This was an important distinction for me to see to move along the path.

Well said, James, but please recall that Paul reasonsed with the philosophers on Mars Hill. To take the position of Kierkegaard that one should jump blindly is inane and I would wonder about anyone who would.

We can't speak to this particular person or this particular discussion, of course, and I think you're right in this: If one brings a preconception to the argument, for example, that the Bible is not historically reliable, then one begins to "throw stones" and what results is an infinite digression into details. This happens inevitably when there is no openness.

As I mentioned before, if you say "no one can provide irrefutable proof of the accuracy and inerrancy of the Bible", I would respond that no one can prove the opposite, but please allow for people like myself, a converted agnostic, who are skeptics by nature and who might gain from seeing "scholarly" arguments from both sides.

I said the the Bible, in this case we're discussing the NT I presume, is more than 99% true to its original documents based on the science of textual criticism (see F.F. Bruce).

Some of the preceding claims that you made as "scholarly" I will not dispute, if you mean that someone with expertise in an appropriate field said it. The problem is "scholars' have also said the opposite (see Dr. Norman Geisler, Dr. Ravi Zacharias). In fact, go to http://debatechristianity.blogspot.com and see two Oxford dons arguing God's existence.

I presume that you get that saying something is "scholarly" is useful but is itself prejudicial.

Thank you and I agree. My comment had more to do with whether historically reliable documents would be discussed or whether the discussion would be purely philosophical.

I think both are valid, but the discussion can go a lot of different ways.

The historical reliability of the Bible is going to be a central issue in this discussion, not the inerrancy of it but rather is it a reliable historical document. I just returned to Christianity after many years as an outspoken agnostic. Even as an agnostic, I conceded this point.

There's more than 5000 manuscripts to cross reference dating back to within a couple of generations of the authors. No other ancient document comes close to this, not Homer not Aristotle, but we accept these without a question.

Using the rules of textual criticism, the Bible can be shown to be more than 99% true to its original based on the variance in the 5000+ manuscripts.

Accepting the historical reliability of the Bible introduces important discussions about eyewitnesses and their various motives. You end up with enemies, family and Rome not producing a body once they found an empty tomb and you end up with all three groups witnessing his death. Now you have a death and a very hard to explain event (at least).

Why didn't the Jewish authorities debunk the myth right when it happened. What about the Roman government? They had just killed Jesus to quell what they believed was an uprising against them. They double checked that he was dead (spear in the side) and then also didn't bother to produce a body to shut everyone up, even though they ended up with a much bigger uprising after Jesus' death.

I'm building a website now for a friend from Sudan, one of the Lost Boys. He was chased by Muslim helicopters from north Sudan when he was 5 yrs old because he was from the Christian south. You can Google their story.

What is the treasure in Nigeria that you mentionied?

How do I take my experience of the Supernatural up a level?

Tell me more. Why there? What's up?