Why is Belief in Christ Necessary? (part 3)

February 5, 2009 at 11:47 am 10 comments

After my last post, R. Eric Sawyer and Jeremiah both left a number of comments.  In some of the comments they try to attack my conviction that belief in Christ is not necessary by comparing salvation to receiving a million dollars.  They claim that if someone is willing to deposit a million bucks into your bank account you have to allow the person to do so.  Similarly, salvation isn’t just given away to everyone.  They claim you must first acknowledge Christ in order to receive it.

I would counter that if someone wanted to give me a million dollars they would tell me directly.  They might send a registered letter, or at least make a phone call.  They wouldn’t write a cryptic message in a book, hope that I would read it, and ask me to believe that I will eventually receive a million dollars.  If they were sincere and the money was a gift and nothing more they would contact me to make the offer.

In a similar vein, if Christ really was God and needed our belief in order to save us, and if he so loved us that he were willing to die for each and every one of us, then he would make it painfully obvious that his story was true.  He wouldn’t couch his story in a book full of errors and contradictions, accumulated from oral traditions over the course of centuries.  His offer of salvation would come in a manner that could not be disputed.

The fact is, if Christ really were God, and offered salvation in the manner in which Christians claim, then God would be irresponsible.  How many sincere people have died without hearing his message through no fault of their own?  What becomes of these people?  If they go to hell, then they did so needlessly because God could have reached them.  But, if they don’t go to hell, then belief in Christ is not necessary as evidenced by their salvation.


Entry filed under: religion. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , .

Why is Belief in Christ Necessary? (part 2) Can Anyone Explain the Holy Trinity?

10 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Jeremiah  |  February 9, 2009 at 1:53 am

    Thaddeus, like I’ve said, God gives us the free will to recive Him or not. And you say the Bible is full of errors, then how come the Bible has been noted, by science, history, and archeology to be full truth, with NO errors?

  • 2. Thaddeus Dombrowski  |  February 9, 2009 at 7:13 am

    “…then how come the Bible has been noted, by science, history, and archeology to be full truth, with NO errors?”

    Jeremiah, who says this? I am not aware of anyone with any credibility in science, history, or archealogy who says the bible is the “full truth” with no errors.

    It’s time to start naming names. Who are these people? I am anxious to know.

  • 3. Jeremiah  |  February 13, 2009 at 7:31 am

    OK, go to this webpage


    I can always put more if you’d like, I’d be more than happy to.

  • 4. Thaddeus Dombrowski  |  February 14, 2009 at 3:30 pm


    The link you provided is to ask.com. Ask.com is just a search engine. The page in question actually comes from http://www.debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibarch.htm, which is a website for debating Christianity vs. Islam. I asked for people with credibility in science, history, or archeology who claim the bible is the full truth with no errors. What you provided is a website run by Hyde Park Christian Fellowship. This won’t cut it.

    The truth is, you won’t be able to find anyone with credibility who will claim that the bible is the full truth with no errors because the bible is filled with errors. I only need to provide one error to show that your statement is false. Here is just one of many websites that document bible errors and contradictions: http://www.freethoughtdebater.com/tenbiblecontradictions.htm . This page documents seven factual errors in the bible along with 12 contradictions just on the first page of the site.

    I used ask.com to find a website documenting contradictions between the bible and archeological evidence. See http://friar-zero.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-christianity-is-wrong.html . Be sure to read what follows the heading of “IX The Bible contradicts Archeology/History…”.

  • 5. Jeremiah  |  February 17, 2009 at 9:41 am

    This IS a Christian site, but with real quotes from scientists like Isaac Newton, Johaness Kepler, etc. I’ll keep researching. And as for the so called contradictions, they can be explained, like some were written by different people(inspired by God), so it could be different views. I’ll get back to you on that. My grandfather is a preacher, and he can probably explain that.


  • 6. Jeremiah  |  February 17, 2009 at 9:45 am


  • 7. Jeremiah  |  February 17, 2009 at 9:46 am


  • 8. Thaddeus Dombrowski  |  February 17, 2009 at 10:45 am

    The first website, http://www.eadshome.com/Sciencequotes.htm, shows quotes from famous scientists, many who lived three or four centuries ago. Mosts of the quotes attest to the scientists’ religious convictions. None of them says that the bible is the full truth with no errors. If any of them had believed this to be true, then they wouldn’t have become scientists. They wouldn’t need to because the bible would have provided all the information they needed.

    The fact they became scientists indicates that they were not willing to settle for some religious explanation of how the universe works.

    The second website, http://www.facingthechallenge.org/arch2.php, documents where the bible is in agreement with archeology. I myself do not doubt that there are some large areas of agreement. What I have a problem with, Jeremiah, is your statement that the bible is “the full truth, with no errors” regarding archeology. I have already pointed you to a website that documents areas where archeology and the bible do not agree. That is sufficient to PROVE your statement false.

    I don’t know how much formal training you have had in logic, but when I provided evidence showing the disagreements between the bible and archeology I PROVED your statement wrong. You are making an absolute declaration that 1) the bible is the full truth, and 2) that it has no errors. I have shown both of these to be wrong. Therefore, you can no longer continue to state that without losing your credibility.

    The third website, http://members.cox.net/jesus0011/bibproof.htm, is a whole ‘nother topic onto itself. What is ironic is that the author of that website is arguing that where the bible disagrees with science then the bible is correct and science is wrong. What’s funny about this is that you have pointed me to a website that accepts the disagreements between the bible and science, in support of your statement that the bible and science are in full agreement!!!! Do you understand why I find that humorous and ironic?

    I am curious, Jeremiah, as to your age and background.

  • 9. Thaddeus Dombrowski  |  February 17, 2009 at 10:54 am

    BTW, I am 46 years old. I am a former Catholic. I studied quite a bit of the bible when I turned away from Catholicism. I eventually concluded that all of Christianity is wrong, not just the Catholic flavor.

    I have two degrees. One in math, another in computer science.

  • 10. Jeremiah  |  February 18, 2009 at 6:28 am

    Well, Thaddeus, I could give you all of the evidence in the world to attest the truthfulness of the Bible, and I don’t think you’d believe a word of it. And you said you were once Catholic. I believe that the Catholic beliefs are a whole nother religion, not Christian. Catholics don’t take the Bible as full authoritiy/God’s word. I will be praying for you Thaddeus, if you’d like to talk to me some more, please feel free to email me at band@nailedband.tk


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


February 2009
« Jan   Mar »

Most Recent Posts

%d bloggers like this: