To David f.

I wasn't insulted by your calling me a missionary, if that's the way you see it that I act like other missionaries I'll take that as a compliment. But I get the impression that my discussion is an insult to you and many others here. If that's the truth, then
I'm sorry for any insult I've caused you, but I think it would be a mistake for me to stop talking about God, Christianity or similar topics. From what I can tell it seems there are a lot of misunderstandings, when talking about those topics. There is also confusion due to either misunderstanding, lies, or ignorance. But my reason for staying on these topics aren't just for you and other beliefs outside of Christianity. I also hope that if anyone reads them who is Christian they can be encouraged in their faith, and to seek their faith further instead of caving in under pressure the pressure of well spoken atheists or by insults that come with the territory in growing cultures that think they've outgrown God.

It's not that I think you have or haven't thought your beliefs through. Honestly I don't know anyone here well enough to know who has and who hasn't thought hard to reach their conclusions. A common belief from atheists that I see is that a Christian is someone who hasn't thought their conclusions through. Don't let that be your mistake. But instead see if what I say holds merit.

(...continued)

One other observation I've seen is non-Christians telling what Christians believe. With a mix of less then half of their assessment being accurate. I've seen this same issue with anyone outside of a held perspective trying to explain it. Because of this as well, I think there is merit to have a Christian view here. So that the bold statements of "Christian's believe ___________ or _____________," can be held more accountable by having a Christian voice to say true or not true about them. Or to teach in a missionary way that would keep those false but boldly asserted statements in check.

....for instance. That the teaching of Jesus to love your neighbor and to love God is not actually a new teaching is not to dismiss His words. The context of it is due to a religious teacher asking Jesus what was the greatest commandment. So of course Jesus taught from the laws themselves to answer him and also teach us. As for Jesus himself. I see no reason to question if he existed. People nowadays are making a lot of claims about history that they can't confirm or deny. And until there is evidence to say they are wrong, and deny their claims, they all say that their portrait of history is correct. Jesus's is likely to have existed because his disciples who knew him died for their faith in Jesus instead of wavering under pressure. The rest gets theological about Jesus's assurance that nothing could remove His kingdom, that His message would be taught to all the nations, and among other things that He would not leave us, but could be invited into each of our hearts. Even to lead us from there through the Holy Spirit.

Why should I tell you this if you've already come to your own conclusions? So that you know anyways.

AJ, I have looked at your supposed faults in the human body and have heard it all before in my biology classes. Nothing new there, just the fact that you believe they are faults in design. Eg,The blind spot, or scotoma, is the place in our eyes where the optic nerve passes through the retina to the brain. All humans and all vertebrates have a blind spot. However there are other forms of sighted things like a fly. So you think flies are preferable as they have no optic nerve to the brain creating a blind spot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSAmADQHx9w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSAmADQHx9w

Josephus,

They’re not faults so much as they are just poor design.

<<I have looked at your supposed faults in the human body and have heard it all before in my biology classes.>>

It's nuts to claim that a god could not have designed us more efficiently and with less complexity, if it is supposed to be all-powerful. A team of engineers and biologists could probably design something far better, given the same materials. The human body (not to mention the bodies of every other living creature) is inefficient because natural selection can only work with what it is given.

<<Nothing new there, just the fact that you believe they are faults in design.>>

It has nothing to do with what I believe. The human body is objectively a poor design. There is no reason to believe that an omnipotent god could not do better if even we mere mortals can spot flaws.

<<So you think flies are preferable as they have no optic nerve to the brain creating a blind spot.>>

Preferable to what? Do you mean superior? If one measures superiority based on the absence of a blind spot then, yes, flies are superior to us.

But why the focus on the optic nerve?

Are you saying that an omnipotent god could not have designed a stronger lower back, or given us multiple sets of adult teeth, or sinuses that drain downwards instead of upwards, or a wider birth canal?

One of my friends is a Jehovah's Witness and a sweet old lady. She commented one day on what a wonderful designer God is. She is an intelligent person and a published author. In addition she is able to forget her arthritis and faulty knees which would not exist if she were designed with no flaws.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Deacon%27s_Masterpiece points one to a poem which describes a humorous example of good design.

If we were designed well everything would fail at the same time and we would die by decomposition rather than by failure of one of our parts.