I will address by topic rather than specific objection. I may miss things but due to time limitations. I also prefer not to copy and paste stuff from Christian apologetical websites either, as some may not be helpful.
Please do.
Good copy/paste right there. The fallacy "of putting words in my mouth" - not good.
What did I copy paste? What words did I put in your mouth?
Be clear
Firstly, Hinduism itself isn't as well-defined a religion as Christianity.
Please elaborate
I haven't studied it in too much detail, probably because Hinduism is a incredibly more diverse religion than Christianity.
Correct (imo)
Hinduism only really defines the end goal, and whatever means is felt to be appropriate for the individual to reach this ultimate reality, it has underpinnings of modified relativism.
Wrong
Hinduism deals with common issues in society, economics, astronomy, mathematics, existential questions, logic , nature and even song/dance.
Also unlike Christians, some forms of Hinduism and Buddhism, all say strongly "don't argue about different religions/doctrines, there is only one." Christianity rejects such a position strongly.
Baseless claim.
Provide me a quote please.
SO be careful with equivocating systems of belief/though which are radically different.
I am not saying hinduism = christianity.
Here is what I AM doing
1. Dan provides evidence for why he thinks Jesus exists, ressurection etc etc
2. Sam provides similar, if not the exact same evidence for why Krishna exists, rebirth etc etc
My challenge: Can you provide me with a single form of proof that cannot be applied in hinduism instead?
Some other points, be careful also as many internet blogs lack in depth research/evidence to support the comparisons made. If they are taking texts like the bible in the manner I have seen others use, then that is deeply problematic. It is one thing to say the Bible is true or not, granted. It is another, to misquote Jesus/the Bible, or strip sentences of their context/purpose and the other things that every piece of literature, regardless of whether it is true or not.
Point noted.
Secondly in your argument against (2), you argue it is the Bible therefore it cannot be considered evidence. Well I think the Bible has to be considered properly, since it does make such claims.
If you consider the bible evidence, I consider the Quran evidence, or te Gita evidence.
Thirdly, I don't think I would personally use majority of those arguments. I will outline ones which I would use, I personally won't bother launching into a full in-depth discussion, considering you are not even convinced from the sound of it that Jesus existed.
I am not convinced because you have not given me any proof of your claim that "the majority of scholars/historians agree that jesus existed"
You linked me some article from an ethiest explaining his point of view...
> Preservation of New Testament --> other texts including those of historical figures whom not one disputes the facts of, are not nearly as well-documented in terms of preservation
So how does the fact that a text is preserved well give any weight to its claims?
(BTW, to say that the bible is more/less preserved than the Quaran will give rise to an endless debate. Google it, but there is no real solution. Nobody really knows if the bible is better preserved, or if the Quran is better preserved)
> Closeness of New Testament to events mentioned --> disproves idea that Jesus theology was developed later
Do not understand this point, can't seem to find anything on google which leads to this conclusion.
Elaborate pls
> Assessment of the claims of Jesus ---> only relevant for those such as Muslims who deny Christ
> Independent eyewitness accounts of the account, including 500 individuals --> this disproves the halluncination theory, as it doesn't fit the data
Can you tell me where I can find 500 individual eyewitness accounts of the ressurection in the bible?
Similar to the 500+ individuals in the battle of kurukshetra.
Again. Not saying hinduism = christianity
Dan: 500 people said they Jesus ressurect it happen!
Sam: 500 people said they saw Krishna ressurect too!
> Empty tomb not accounted for. --> why couldn't the Jews produce a body?
Similarly, no body of Krishna was found
> The disciples state changes positively --> causes doubt for the claim the disciples stole the body, and disproves the swoon theory, to a major degree.
Also The disciples (Gopis) state in the Bhagvad gita changes positively
> The radical conversion of Paul
The radical conversion of Arjuna
Somehow we have to synthesis different things. The resurrection is a plausible explanation and best explanation that fits the data.
I can think of other plausible explanations which do not disobey the laws of physics
Now of course, you may argue that other claims from other religions do the same. However, I wouldn't know the details of such claims. I personally am not too aware of the Vedas, in terms of when they were written.
You can do either of two things
1. Disagree that the evidence is the same from other religions, on which I can provide you quotes/links etc
2. Agree that other religioins also have similar evidence (For which you have to deal with the question, then why beleive in christ? Why not allah? )
You are inferring that God can treat sinners in the same way all the time.
This is a false projection onto what God is like.
My bad
Just seems a bit off that
1. God let his son die and undertook so much pain to clear our sins
2. God killed us because we sinned
Seems to me god is conflicted
In 1) He sacrifices himself for us sinners
in 2) He murders all the sinners
God does exercise the right to wipe out all of humanity in an instance. The reason he doesn't in particular reasons, is to give people a chance to repent for instance.
Yea
God created sin and sinners
God created a world where we sin and are born with a bias against him (This bias, was put into us by god)
God could kill us all for being sinners, but he is such a nice guy and lets us repent for them
Noah is supposed to point us to Christ. God always intend to save the righteous remnant.
Feelsbad for all those who grew up without christian teachings, because they were somehow expected to know that it is not Allah, Buddah or Krishna, But rather Jesus!
It just happens at the time of Noah, the only righteous ones are Noah and his family. They are not righteousness because of their works, but by faith they trusted God.
All the other non-righteous people (sinners I assume) are slayed by god.
The same goes for those saved by Jesus. While Jesus dies for those who are sinners, he takes upon himself the punishment.
All non-righteous people (Sinners I assume) are saved, as god sends his son to suffer and die for them
Make up ur mind dude
Some things to address:
- God does not create sin. You assume he does. But that is not the case - sin is not a physical object. God did not create us separated from him.
I assume me murdering the shit out of someone is considered sin
He could have created a world where I do not murder the shit out of someone!
He could have created a perfect world!
But he created a world where we sin, we suffer, and we are punished for it
- Secondly, God as creator is the one who gives and takes life.
Sure. Just might not be Jesus, could be Buddah!
Concerning whether God will fix it, it doesn't make sense for someone to ask that question, if they already believe God cannot possibly exist.
Child X beleives in god. Child X is in extreme povery. God does not fix
But I digress,
Most of these, come down to what God is like, and can we trust him?
1. God is (supposedly) caring and loving
2. There is a lot of suffering in this world
3. God can fix this
- God does not fix it
Why does Jesus return come sooner, if his return will bring about the final fix.
The reassurance for Christians who see the work of the cross, is they know the end date is fixed and coming. Think of D-Day in WW2, a decisive victory that means the end of the war is guaranteed to happen. For Christians, that event is the cross.
Christians should ask
Why did he not come 3 hours ago? 300 years ago? 1000 years ago? Why does he not come now?
He should end our damn suffering already instead of waiting for some cool D-Day epic extravaganza finale
For the atheist who denies Jesus existed, or that Jesus died, or that Jesus rose again; there are logically no hope. And so an answer to that question would only make sense if those things were true.
Stop beating around the bush
Give me one plausible reason that God has not come yet and has let us suffer for so long (decades and decades). He could come now and end all suffering, but why won't he?
That is why Christians, the death and resurrection of Jesus is important. It grounds our assurance and hope, that this world will be renewed into a new creation.
This is the end of the conversation for me, as that is where the buck sticks for me.
It is only the start for me, but you do not have to reply anymore if you do not wish
I would like answers to all the other points I mentioned, as the majority are not covered here (From anyone reading this
)
