"Stop Judging Me!!!"

Many People are quick to accuse another person of being judgemental when they are challenged on their beliefs, worldviews, or even simple matters. This is a popular response of many people to Christians or to anybody when they feel they are being "lectured" or told what to do, and how to think.
When accused of being judgemental, Christians should first ask the accuser of what he means by being "judgemental." It is best to settle on a definition that both agree on and then go from there. If the accuser defines judging as thinking another person to be wrong, then they themselves have also judged the other person for for stating they were wrong for judging others.
As Christians we know that the Bible tells us not to judge ( Matthew 7:1-2, James 4:12), but the natural man is judgemental from birth. Christianity believes that there is one judge, and that we are not to judge others but God should judge people. But the fact of the matter is that humans are judgemental whether they are Morman, Catholic, Islamic, Hindu, or even Christian. Judging Wrong? yes and no. When Jesus condemned judging, he wasn't saying we should never make judgements about people, but first examine ourselves first before trying to help another.
In a situation where two people are argueing about one being judgemental to the other, they should be sure of their definition of "judging others", and then be aware of what the Bible says about judging others.

Proving Miracles by Proving God Exists

Many people today do not believe in miracles or even count the possibilities of a miracle happening. Since the Christian faith is dependent on a miracle, people also discredit Christianity has being real or possible. I am going to try and prove miracles from one aspect. This is only one proof for arguments for miracles.

One way to prove miracles exist and do happen is to prove that God exists. The argument for miracles and God's existence are closely related and also tied together. You will need an argument that are not only proves the existence of God, but also establish God's nature. There are three attributes about God's nature that would prove that miracles exist:
1. God is a being powerful enough to produce events in
space/time.
2. God is an intelligence with a capacity to frame the
convergence of events of space/time.
3. God is a personality with moral concern to act in
history.
There are three traditional arguments whose conclusions answer these three descriptions of God: the cosmological, the teleological, and the moral argument respectively.

The cosmological argument states that our universe runs in a cause and effect arrangement. Everything in this universe is caused by something else which is caused by something else and so on. You eventually get to a point where there must be an ultimate cause is not caused by anything else,but it sustains itself. This ultimate cause idea would display qualities of "divine nature" or "God-ness" or in other words the idea of a God who is non-dependent.

The teleological argument states that the universe is arranged and organized in a way that would lead someone to think there is a designer. The universe is so finely tuned that the possibility of the universe happening by chance is minute or impossible. If any of the natural laws (i.e. gravity, polarity of water molecules) were greater or lesser, the universe would not be able to sustain life and may not exist at all. The possibility of a designer is greater than the universe happening by random chance.

The moral argument argues that there is an absolute standard by which we all base out actions on. Even people who don't believe in absolute truth contradicts themselves. For they will tell you that you are being morally wrong, but how can that be possible if there is no absolute truth. Those people will say that your morality is good or bad, but compared to what. There must be a standard that they compare your morality to. That standard will also have to be set by a higher power that is outside of this world. This higher power would have to a God.

These arguments prove there is a God, but only the characteristics of one that could understand value and make free moral judgments. This is only one part of the argument for miracles.

Christians: Are they truly Tolerant?

Most people say Christians are intolerant of other viewpoints. Some argue that the Crusades and the Inquisition are prime examples of "Christian intolerance". One must realize that these events were the makings of a small sect of over zealous Christians not the whole community of believers. Also one must define their terms. For instance relativist define tolerance as " the equality of all religions or truth claims", but the correct definition of true tolerance is "putting up with error". By saying "error" one must concede to the fact that there is a standard by which all things are based. This would also cause one to say that this standard is the one truth. One can see that the relativist have warped the true meaning of tolerance to fit their ideals, and in doing this they have lost the true meaning of tolerance in their eager pursuit of bringing people to their ideas, or what they believe to be the absolute truth.

Responding to Relativism

If someone were to tell me "that's true for you, but not for me," I would respond by saying that their statement is contradictory. When someone makes this statement they are recognizing that the statement should be true for everyone and therefore contradicts the statment said. They are trying to create a truth in the statement that is relevant for everyone. They cannot say that no belief is true for everyone because you are making a claim that this statement and relativism is true for everyone and therefore absolutism is false. You can't say at the same time that nothing is true and yet say that this statement is true.