would you like to host a written debate between Tim and myself here?
it’d need to be on the main blog post section for it to work …
if so, hit me up!

There’s nothing closed minded at all about what I’m saying, you have simply and repeatedly given arguments which don’t hold up. You your self have NEVER accepted any facts and evidence that goes counter to what you believe. All you have to do to convince my that I’m wrong is give me real evidence of such. Again you’ve never done so. You try to point out first century historians like Josephus but then refuse to accept that close analysis of his work indicates out side alterations, and then I remember you tired to us Papias as if it was a good or first hand source. The material you have argued with has always lacked substance. Sure the first time someone listens to you (my self included) it sounds like you know what your talking about; It seems as if you’ve brought with you valid points as well as evidence, but once someone goes and actually examines your arguments the massive holes and lack of substance becomes quite apparent. I’m not being mean, or harsh, I’m simply stating the general lack to your arguments.

You called my close minded yet I have actually listened to your arguments and tried to understand them. You can call me closed minded all you want, but I’m anything but. I will still listen to what you have to say, which I made apparent in my first post, thought I have no illusions any longer that you will actually provide something of substance rather then recycled tissue paper. I’m simply being honest with you. Forgive me if you can’t handle it.

I don’t understand why you feel the need to be so dang uncharitable, old friend.
Look, if you make a good point during a debate, you make a good point.

What I’m saying is that your response displays such a stiff close-mindedness that it’s difficult to imagine that you could ever concede that just once someone on the other side of you may make a good point – you know, something that you may not know the answer to or that you may actually be wrong about. I respect atheism as really the only half-way sensible alternative to Christianity. I truly think that if Jesus was not Lord, then the only semi-reasonable alternatives would be Judaism or yes, some form of atheism.

However, I do not think the evidence points in that direction at all, so even though I may empathize with you in a certain way, at the end I think you are incorrect. But this does not mean I can not see where you are coming from most of the time.

Anyway, if you are serious, then how about a sort of web cam video ‘debate’ instead of typing? It’d be quicker. I can e-mail some ideas I have on this if you are interested.

vocab

You seem to be saying that the Resurrection is a hoax or a fraud.
Would you care to debate that point?

vocab

Funny, I’ve always wondered why the Christians have two April Fools’ Days. One they call Easter….

but this is a simple description of hell from a gospel tract:

Hell is eternity in the presence of God without a mediator. Heaven is eternity in the presence of God with a mediator, the Lord Jesus Christ.