Now. lets say prison rapresented ur stubborness, ur insolence, ur anger; the one keeping u from being a real sincere person, denying you to be happy and taking your freedom of laughing with joy and being a wonderful person..
Jesus represents your parent…
who took your blame so you would not go to prison and stay away from HIM for eternity…
He decided to take ur blame and guilt and shame so you can be with Him for the rest of your life and enjoy freedom and happiness…
God never wanted u to suffer or be sad…He wants you to have everything that is good and you desire in your heart according to His will…
I have committed my life to Him from the day I was born, and there is no moment in my life i regret because He took care of me and ordered all my steps…because he takes care of me and because i live my life in His ends, my paths are ordered..
Give your life to Jesus and you will never regret that day because He will keep you from all evil and sadness. If you have been searching for something all your life, and always looking for a temporary high to keep you happy…it won’t last…
the answer is Jesus…He will fufill you and make you pure…
you can start over and all your sins will be forgiving and washed in His precious blood…
which redeems everything and makes old things new.
Be restored…Return to innocence…
Call unto the name of Jesus and say:
Lord forgive me, I have been a sinner.
Please enter into my heart and redeem me. make me new and shape me into your image.
Become the King of my Heart.
On This Day I accept you as my Saviour and Christ.
Amen.
Congrats!~you are a born again Christian!

There is no evidence that has not been argued and refuted a thousand times. Especially when the evidence is written in the legendary fantasy novel “Bible”. It’s a good book, btw. You should try reading it. Nowhere near as good as LOTR, but that’s just my personal opinion.

If you’ve NEVER heard any of the arguments against those evidence then where the hell have you been? Go browse the internet for a week or so before coming back here kiddo. This place is too small for those kind of extended discussion

Come on now, I’ve been around the block a FEW times. What I have not heard, and what I was asking for here, is any arguments about the Trilemma line of reasoning. Jesus claims to be Lord, and we have only the option of judging him to be as He said (Lord), a Liar conscious that He was lying, or a Lunatic who did not know that He was lying but thought He was telling the truth. Is that the case or do we have other options?
Jesus also claimd to be God, so this line of reasoning does apply to the atheism debate.

We don’t believe, we disbelieve irrational explanations. Read Voltaire, then maybe you’ll understand the basics.
A claim is not a proof.

No, a claim is not proof. But a claim is evaluated properly on the basis of its validity, and proof is the major source of validity; ask any judge or police officer.
The claims of Christ carry with them an awful lot of proof, but see my comment to Dull Blade- the apologetic proof for Christ is not the real issue here. The state of your willingness to acknowledge the proof that is there, for example the contents of Strobel’s books that I mentioned- this is the issue. I can spend years going over all the claims made on every hokie internet site run by some pro- or anti-Christiain idiot and end up at the same place- contradictory claims that cannot both be true. You know that. Running around playing apologist is fun, claiming superior proof and belittling the claims or thoughts of others, but it has its place and that is not a big place.
Christianity is a relationship, not a religion, which means it is not a list of rules or do’s/don’ts (memo to Dull- this was the issue with Catholicism for me). If you want a relationship with God, you can have one; if you want a formula for coping with life, you can go to a lot of places and get that and eventually find one that works reasonably well for you. Jesus Christ doesn’t offer that, though. Voltaire does, at least his version. If that is what you want, then you’ll do much better with Voltaire. In your atheism, what is it that you want?
Generally, the life that people want is an easier one, a more fun one than the one that they have now; Jesus doesn’t promise that to His people. If you want a philosphy that makes you feel better about yourself and about life, then perhaps atheism is more suited to you. Not that that isn’t a fine goal, to feel better about oneself and about life, mind you. Christianity makes me beel better about myself, but only after I first admit that I am fallen before God and not able to achieve significance on my own efforts, sort of a downer before an upper. The upper is eternally permanent, though. Walking with God certainly isn’t easy and it isn’t a feel-good pill; if you are looking for either of those things then you are not in the state of mind to approach the God of the Bible. Are we talking about atheism or Christianity because we are comparing the strengths and weaknesses of philosophies or because we are seeking something to answer a deep need in our lives and wondering where to turn? Apologetics doesn’t fill the deep need, it only provides mental gratification. Knowing God personally, that’s where it’s at for me, the fulfillment of my need for value, direction, purpose, and significance. If I do not believe that there is a God outside myself, then I look to myself to make up the reasons for these things, and I know intuitively that the reasons I find are equally as useless as the reasons that everyone else must find within themselves who do not believe in God, and I know that our world simply cannot survive if we are all to invent our own significance, purpose, and moral compasses (what is fine for me may be evil to you, how are you to live with that if my “good” includes harming you?). Even the insistence on “the common good” or “contract law” as the source of moral guidance is an admission that we can think like we are our own Gods but actually can’t live that way (this demonstrates the futility of that thinking; it doesn’t apply in real life). I know intuitively that the world is not random in its origins or operation, and that all humans are not intended to make up our significance and beliefs as we go along; if you are not of that conviction, then clearly Christianity is not for you, and no amount of back-and-forth about the evidence for this or that is relevant.
How’s that for stream of consiousness?

Drew,

When I went to college (PSU), leaving the shackles of religion became so much easier! I was raised a serious catholic. I went to catholis grade school and high school. I went to college and in the dorms I met hindus, jehovahs, jews, arabs, baptists, mormons, and every shade of christian. And we stayed up all night talking and drinking and smoking and arguing. I heard all about the goofy things people believe all over the world and relized that believing in transubstatiation or virgin birth or resurrection, was just as weird as believing in reincarnation or voodoo or lucky rabbits feet. It was all just nonsense people fed themselves to feel better. Myself included.

At the same time I was learning a lot about chemistry, biology, and damn near every other ology.

The answer was obvious, to me anyway. Born-again atheist if you will, and i’ve never been so happy.

Blade (clearly not dull!)-
Uh, at the risk of incurring your ire in addition to that of others, I don’t think that religion has any shackles that are not rooted in human ignorance, immaturity, and emotionalism, all of which are not confined to any religion, let alone Christianity, which is a relationship and not a religion. The follies that you probably think of as the “shackles” that you speak of are not unique to Catholicism or any other philosophy. The problem with religion is that the people who subscribe to them, all of them including the relgion of atheism, are fundamentally flawed and tend towards irrational conclusions and behavior- this characterizes the fringes of all devotee groups on the Earth, without any exceptions. Using such an idea against Christianity and not against all philosophies is hypocritical.

I think I had mentioned that I grew up Catholic. Not sure what to say about how you tracked so radically different from me in the same discussions and kinds of exposure to the marketplace of ideas. I think that the proof is not the issue, though. Not that there is any weakness in the support for Christianity, but that is not the main issue most of the time.
The period between my having the gospel explained to me and my acceptance of Christ as my personal Lord and Savior, during which my initial research into the validity of Christianity versus the claims of other philosophies took place, was about seven months (most of my freshman year). The research part was in the first month, and the remaining time (six out of the seven months) was primarily my process of asking questions and reconciling myself to what I was convinced in my head was true. I think the activities of the six-month portion of my own journey are more likely those that have not taken place in your life, the process of opening up your heart to look inside and recongnize the emptiness and insecurity there. If we got into an apologetc debate we would find that the difference between your thoughts about God and mine are emotional at their root, not intellectual. The proof is secondary to the openness to the proof.
Glad to hear you went to Penn State, though. I grew up for a while in Pennsylvania and have always been a Joe Paterno fan-