Part 10 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

The question was answered here: http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=335268&p=1063393917#post1063393917 : explanation was given and then a question posed to you that you have avoided. Hello Pot.

 

All you said in that post was that you didn't have an obligation to prove your claims.

 

That is the explanation. Science does not prove anything, therefore there is no need or obligation for theists to prove anything. What is good for the Goose is good for the Gander. Are you promoting the notion of a double standard in favor of science and the non-theists? One where science and non-theists are immune from providing 'proof' while the theists are mandated to provide 'proof'?

 

Still waiting

 

I would be very interested in reading your serious scholars, do you have names or books? Thanks

 

If nothing can be proven or disproven, then how can there be falsehoods about MR's religion?

 

there can't be. they worked out early on that that which had previously gone unquestioned (it's all TRUE), was likely going to need some re-engineering if it was to survive all these new pesky and insubordinate question askers. thus they decreed that, like an invisible friend, he/she/it can be anything you want it to be - and no one can ever prove otherwise.

 

Tell me who is verifying information that runs counter to beliefs based on the Bible? What are these verifiable and established information you speak of? All I can say is that the Bible is the Word of God and thus it is inerrant.

There is no such thing as different versions of "The Word of God".

There is only one Bible that speaks, "The Word of God"

It's true that there are many differing versions of the Bibles, but even though as seen through Scripture some of the wording is not exactly the same, the messages it conveys are still intact and have not been changed from the original text, thus they are still expressing "The Word of God" as accurately as possible.

Let me give you an example of two different Bibles, who are in essence expressing the same message regardless that their wordings in the text differ.

4 "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth!....9 "When I made a cloud its garment, And thick darkness its swaddling band,"... Job 38:4, 9 New American Standard (NAS)

4 "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?...9 "and as I clothed it with clouds and wrapped it in thick darkness?" Job 38:4, 9 New Living Translation (NLT)

Clearly we can visually see from the above two verses that most of the wordings are not exact, the word foundation is singular in the NAS version, while it is plural in the NLT version, we also see an exclamation mark after earth in the NAS version, while we see a question mark after earth in the NLT version.

Even though we distinctly see these visual differences, the message is essentially the same in both versions.

The message is basically saying that when God created the earth on day 1, the earth was dark because He surrounded it with thick clouds. This darkness is mentioned in Genesis 1:2

 

Your explanation for why you post on these forums is because you don't have to prove your arguments? Uh.. okay.

And, no, I don't believe that science can't prove things. At least in the sense that you usually define prove. So, your argument that there is a double standard is based on an unproven claim about what science and science can't do.

 

and yet, you still haven't said which is the ACTUAL word of god. as it was whispered into the ears of the goatherds.

 

Obviously neither do you have to prove your arguments. You have not proven any of them yet. If you had, then I would have been convinced long ago with all the stuff you have posted.

I don't care if you believe it or not. People of better character and esteem than you have said otherwise.

See, you can't even get that straight. It is "PROOF" that I have been talking about with that definition... NOT "prove". Keep the record straight.

It is IMHO better than what you have offered.

 

The difference is that I try to, whether or not I am able to compel somebody.

So, what? You're the one making the claim now. Are you just going to say it is true because other people have said it?

Uh, are they not related? Don't you prove something by offering proof?

What is? You haven't even attempted to prove that science can't prove things before this post, and all you've said in this post is that other people say it is true.

 

What makes your religion's "scripture" any more accurate than the "scriptures" of other religions?

 

that is, indeed, one of the tougher questions.

my guess is you'll receive responses like "because the bible is the only book which claims to be the truth", or variations on the theme.

you might also see a dash of "because no other scriptures have stories about the walking dead, etc"

the upshot of which is that they have no way of knowing whether they're barking up entirely the wrong tree, since the only qualifier they use for the truth of the bible, is the bible. oh yeah, and their 'feelings'

 

What a crock.
Science, by definition, provides proof. http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_19
Religion, by definition, requires faith (belief without evidence) - and is therefore wholly incapable of proving anything. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/faith

This is why Incorporeal constantly dodges any requests for proof of his beliefs while hypocritically demanding proof of everyone else's.

Obviously, a belief that is true has more value than a belief that is false. Scientific process allows for validation of beliefs. This is an obvious threat to religious faith as those beliefs do not stand up to any rational analysis/scrutiny.

 

I could write several books on how I know God is smarter than man...lol

But really I just need to say a few things and that will suffice for now.

Scripture tells us at the very beginning of the Holy Bible, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Genesis 1:1 NLT

Scientists till this day can't tell us definitively how everything came to be. All they can say is that "it just happened"

God told us in the Bible He did it and so far no man can prove Him wrong!

God....1

Man....0

 

the question was how do YOU know god is smarter than man, not 'what does the bible have to say on the matter'.

 

If Adam and Eve didn't need clothes originally and I assume that souls in heaven don't require any clothes either because they will either be without sin or exist in a completely different form altogether, then why aren't angels naked and does God appear to people in their dreams naked as well?

 

Indeed that is the difference. I am not trying to compel anyone.

Well, it is like this. Unlike the arguments presented by you, I found those arguments presented there to be compelling to my mind and subsequently I believe it to be 'true'.

No! The offering of 'proof' does not necessarily compel the reader or analyst to accept it as 'true'. Should the reader or analyst accept the "proof" as "true", then the 'proof' becomes 'proven' and 'true'. The relationship is that of cause and effect. The cause is the "proof" the effect is the 'prove' status. The word 'prove' is the validation process aimed at the 'proof'. Proof is the evidence, argument, proposition entered to support a claim.

I don't need to prove it. That 'proof' has already been submitted to the public domain by others more qualified than me. Their testimony has been entered into this thread by me. If you don't want to accept that "proof" that is entirely up to you, however your acceptance of non acceptance does not negate the fact that I have offered 'proof'.

 

The snake was the devil, there is no such thing as another god, for there is only one God, Almighty God, the Creator of the universe and everything else that exists!

 

Can you give us an exact age of the earth?...that's ok, don't bother because I know it will be a guesstimate...lol

 

if religion x, y, or z says the same thing, but they're referring to .... say .... a snake god, how have you determined that they're wrong and you're right? if both faiths have books claiming the one true god and magical events, how did you reach your conclusion?

 

Well of course a critic of the Bible will say that there was not enough water to satisfy the Noah flood condition, or the Exodus never happened, or Jesus never existed, or deny whatever else Scripture tells us.

It is comforting to the non-believer, it gives them a sense that there is no God, therefore there will be no Judgment Day.

But sadly for the non-believer it will not be comforting come Judgment Day!

 

If this were true then why are there so many versions of christianity?
Why are there at least 3 versions of religions all claiming the same God?

ps - you've already been told the bible makes no reference to thick clouds. That is just someones misinterpretation of the written words.

 

When it comes to God, nobody can prove/disprove Him and so it's senseless to be talking about proofs.

It really boils down to faith, in the end it takes faith that God exist/doesn't exist.

"And it is impossible to please God without faith. Anyone who wants to come to Him must believe that God exists and that He rewards those who sincerely seek Him."---Hebrews 11:6 NLT

Because of all the evidence we see, for the believer only a small step of faith is required.

There are an abundance of facts along with logical arguments that makes the existence of God reasonable. So what is the most reasonable choice?...being a believer of course.

We are most certainly entitled to believe in God. By contrast, the atheist who believes there is no God and the agnostic who is not sure if there is a God must take a leap of faith to deny that all the evidence is best explained by the existence of God.