Agreed, but some things are’nt historical, like the great entry of Jesus in Jerusalem. It seems that the Romans did not see that :)
Just because we cannot find documentation elsewhere does not mean it did not happen. There is not any documentation anywhere that I ate breakfast today; but that does not mean it did not happen.
If we find documentation stating otherwise, that is another situation. I have never read or heard of any historical documents or archaelogical finds which have proven the Bible false.
Just because we don’t have documentation, means it didn’t necessarily not happen, right?
Well, we don’t have any documentation about the universe creating itself.
So, by this logic, we have now to look for documentation proving it was created?
Well, go ahead then.
I love these shouting matches between the theists (Moses’ Sister, Crypt, me, City, Wild, IZ,) and the Atheists (Fisternis, Falk, Ghoul, Yanny, Marshal) moderated by those on the fence (Moses, Disclaimer). Hundreds of hours of thought, typing, and research, dozens of threads, thousands of words of discussion and debate, and no one believes any different than when we started.
Maybe we should all convert to Budhism and call it even. :D
Then we can argue about whether or not Budhists believe in God. :)
There is a lot to back up the bible, the shroud of Turin, historical records, archeology, etc. And there is a lot of craziness like Unicorns and God becoming flesh. Net result, it takes faith to believe that it is the word of God.
I put 15 minutes into that post and I didn’t get anywhere. Oh well…
:lol:
YB - I agree. I feel active adult debate is healthy.
We came to the conclusion on earlier threads that the Bible could not be taken literally. Again, only the faithful can find rationale in it. I have little doubt that “Jesus” the man existed. Without the miracle and supernatural events, he was a revolutionary in religious thought. Proof in his resurrection (or not) is impossible to achieve and again left to the faithful.
If you want to explain the Bible in literal terms, explain this:
“Let US make man in OUR own image, according to OUR likeness”
GEN 1-26
Who are “US” and “OUR” ???
“that the sons of GOD saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful;
and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose”
GEN 6-2
and
“There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of GOD came in to the daughters of men and they bore children
to them. Those were the mighty men who were old, men of renown.”
GEN 6-4
Monotheistic God or alien intervention ???
Reference - Ibid
If you are going to respond, please read the entire thread (it is currently only one page long – of course my current posting may bump it to two). I already listed 12 above plus the messianic fulfillment. It is not proof that the entire Bible is true, but the likely hood of many of the prophesies I listed becoming fulfilled is larger than winning the lottery. If you put more than one of these prophesies together it is like trying to win the lottery multiple times. These prophesies show that there is inspired authorship.
There is little doubt to say that Christian prophesies do come true at a greater rate and are much more accurate and precise than do the prophesies of other religions. TM has a list of fullfilled revelations, so I can ask her to post them later on. Still, using prophesies (or ones that haven’t come true – yet) to prove or disprove the existence of God (or in this case, Jesus), isn’t the real way to go.
…moderated by those on the fence (Moses, Disclaimer).
There is nothing I like more than Good Religion and nothing I hate more than Bad Religion. It’s as simple as that. Of course the answer isn’t so black and white…
:lol:
Ha, as a thiest I predict that in the year 3041 AM (After Moses), the world will erupt in flames and humanity will be loss. Well, until then - I’m in the clear :wink:
Also how many “prophesies” and/or “miracles” do you need to prove God’s existance and the correctness of the Bible? How many false ones do you need to disprove it?
Alright they a couple prophesies which came true. However, after doing the research on these in comparison to Biblical prophesies fulfilled, anyone can notice that the odds of these prophesies being fulfilled are very different. The Bible prophesies are much more specific and put the odds against them. However, they were fulfilled.
There is probably not as much Norse prophecies. And i am curious about all those christian prophecies fullfilled, i know some of them (sadly) but i never find any to be very convincing; even when i was christian. Jesus did not said the end of the world would come before his generation die ?
Sounds like solid research here. This does nothing to help your argument.
I am sorry but the last thing i care with religion is prophecies, these can be interpret from a lot of way so it is useless. I prefer to look at those religious people, look at history and look at the nature to form my idea. Also i don’t know about all religion and i doupt you can say oterwise.
The shroud of turin; everything seem to point an hoax (microbiology & C14 dating), still lot of people believe it to be true… Same thing goes with prophecies, people believe what they want to believe, and they see what they want to see. It seem to be very hard to be objective.
People want to believe in mythology; well they will believe in mythology even if it is against science.
I agree. I have weighed the evidence each religion claims to have or has shown (as in Christianity). After my review of the evidence, the choice was easy.
Well me too. Christianism offer a lot, but i don’t want to live in a lie.
And about the those who do not want to find god, this can hardly apply to me as i was trying to understand him with science before beign atheist. This is a very easy escuse…
Quote from Wild2000 “Jesus was real. The other characters you mention from mythology never existed. Zeus is not real and neither is the tooth fairy. Mythology is fiction. Christianity is based on a real living person. This is a huge difference.”
Well I think Jesus is a Mythological character.
Nothing you have posted has change that fact.
Your evidence for Jesus being real is that a Roman said so and it has a large entry in an Encyclopaedia ???
Nice job.
Quote from Wild2000 “Those who do not really want to find God will not. They will always find excuses. A person has to maintain an open mind to all things and remove the bias that it is not possible for God or the supernatural to exist.”
Oh you mean abandon logic, I see.
@Mr:
Quote from Wild2000 “Jesus was real. The other characters you mention from mythology never existed. Zeus is not real and neither is the tooth fairy. Mythology is fiction. Christianity is based on a real living person. This is a huge difference.”
Well I think Jesus is a Mythological character.
Nothing you have posted has change that fact.
God is as mythological as Zeus, Odin, Wotan or Belenos ! Only the prophet is not mythological, but we attribute him mythological power, so i don’t see why christianism is less mythological than the Norse, German, Celtil or Greek mythology.
:lol:
Theres lots of “Proof” that Aliens landed at Roswell. Theres lots of “Proof” the Loch-Ness Monster exists. Are either fact? No.
:lol:
@Mr:
Your evidence for Jesus being real is that a Roman said so and it has a large entry in an Encyclopaedia ???
Nice job.I gave a dozen sources and only two were Roman related. I do not rely on the Encyclopaedia, it is just another interesting additional source that is non-biblical. If Jesus was Mythical, a “logical” person would surely think that the Encyclopaedia would recognize this like it does for the Greek, Egyptian, Norse, and Celtic mythologies.
@Mr:
Quote from Wild2000 “Those who do not really want to find God will not. They will always find excuses. A person has to maintain an open mind to all things and remove the bias that it is not possible for God or the supernatural to exist.”
Oh you mean abandon logic, I see.
If your definition of logic includes only what we as humans are able to understand, then yes. I am sorry if I am asking someone to keep an open mind when trying to evaluate these things objectively. Do I have a bias? Yep. Do you? I am just trying to remind people that their personal bias affects how they accept any evidence placed before them.
I think it is one thing to look at all of the evidence and make a decision based on it. I can accept that. However, I get the feeling that for many of you, there is not any amount of evidence that could be provided that would make you accept the idea that God exists. - I think I will add that to the existence thread.
The problem is that what you claim is evidence is weak at best.
And your angrements for it are fallaicous in your appeals to authority.
:lol:
@Mr:
The problem is that what you claim is evidence is weak at best.
And your angrements for it are fallaicous in your appeals to authority.Please tell me what would you consider as a valid source of authority? Please show me where my fallacies are. I am not presenting fictious evidence. These are hostile sources which have no relation to Christianity.
Maybe what we need to do is define how a book of antiquity gains creditability. Any experts out there before I take a stab at it?
When I was searching web sites about prophecies I found every site, in there augrements for Bible truth, where saying something like " Well non-chirstans wrote about a Jesus". That is weak evidence in my opinion.
As well as saying Jesus was real because three men saw him rise from the grave and that they would rather die than say it was untrue.
Would they die for a lie? was there stance on it being valid agurment for truth.
Thats great evidence……its not eh.
@Mr:
@Mr:
The problem is that what you claim is evidence is weak at best.
And your angrements for it are fallaicous in your appeals to authority.Please tell me what would you consider as a valid source of authority? Please show me where my fallacies are. I am not presenting fictious evidence. These are hostile sources which have no relation to Christianity.
Maybe what we need to do is define how a book of antiquity gains creditability. Any experts out there before I take a stab at it?
When I was searching web sites about prophecies I found every site, in there augrements for Bible truth, where saying something like " Well non-chirstans wrote about a Jesus". That is weak evidence in my opinion.
As well as saying Jesus was real because three men saw him rise from the grave and that they would rather die than say it was untrue.
Would they die for a lie? was there stance on it being valid agurment for truth.
Thats great evidence……its not eh.
Actually many people saw Jesus after he had arisin - according to the scriptures - many more than 3.
Also when you are looking back 2000 years, there is going to be limited evidence left. How do we know that which happened 200 years ago (say the Napoleonic Wars) really happened? Because some books were written? How do we confirm those books as fact? Collaborating books written by other “observers”. Even if we had 200 year old people hanging about with any sense left, how could we believe them when they say that the war happened? How can we believe anything that is written about anything - historical, scientific, etc.?
The fact is, the bible has withstood the test of time quite nicely. Events in it are confirmed by independent/3rd party historians present at the time, as well as current archeologists (to a small degree).
tsssss, i NEVER said that was an argument for Atheism !!! I am just asking a question !!! I never even said Scientists were more atheist, i am just asking a question, i never use such fallacious argument to caution atheism. YB said the fact 85% of the poppulation is theist constitute an argument about the concept of god (and you support the fallacies), i just ask a question i never use that as an argument for atheism ! How can i be fallacious if i am not even making an argument ? It does not even implie anything, i have not said “why xx% of scientist and blablabla” !!!
it’s obvious you think i’m naive, but puh-lease. a person with an IQ greater than a hammer could have seen your implications a mile away. you were caught in a fallacious argument. Deal with it.
field marshall - i’ve many times wondered about the passages you quoted. There are others - the book of Job where God meets with his “sons”, and Romans where Paul refers to other "g"ods ("we know that there are other gods . . . "). I seriously consider that there are other celestial beings other than angels . . . kind of a la polytheistic religions. It would not surprise me to at the end of it all find that there is some kind of a pantheon out there that provides the fodder for all of the myths (not too say i yet believe in it). The important thing for Christians is that there is one "G"od - creator/saviour, etc.
@cystic:
@Mr:
@Mr:
The problem is that what you claim is evidence is weak at best.
And your angrements for it are fallaicous in your appeals to authority.Please tell me what would you consider as a valid source of authority? Please show me where my fallacies are. I am not presenting fictious evidence. These are hostile sources which have no relation to Christianity.
Maybe what we need to do is define how a book of antiquity gains creditability. Any experts out there before I take a stab at it?
When I was searching web sites about prophecies I found every site, in there augrements for Bible truth, where saying something like " Well non-chirstans wrote about a Jesus". That is weak evidence in my opinion.
As well as saying Jesus was real because three men saw him rise from the grave and that they would rather die than say it was untrue.
Would they die for a lie? was there stance on it being valid agurment for truth.
Thats great evidence……its not eh.Actually many people saw Jesus after he had arisin - according to the scriptures - many more than 3.
Also when you are looking back 2000 years, there is going to be limited evidence left. How do we know that which happened 200 years ago (say the Napoleonic Wars) really happened? Because some books were written? How do we confirm those books as fact? Collaborating books written by other “observers”. Even if we had 200 year old people hanging about with any sense left, how could we believe them when they say that the war happened? How can we believe anything that is written about anything - historical, scientific, etc.?
The fact is, the bible has withstood the test of time quite nicely. Events in it are confirmed by independent/3rd party historians present at the time, as well as current archeologists (to a small degree).tsssss, i NEVER said that was an argument for Atheism !!! I am just asking a question !!! I never even said Scientists were more atheist, i am just asking a question, i never use such fallacious argument to caution atheism. YB said the fact 85% of the poppulation is theist constitute an argument about the concept of god (and you support the fallacies), i just ask a question i never use that as an argument for atheism ! How can i be fallacious if i am not even making an argument ? It does not even implie anything, i have not said “why xx% of scientist and blablabla” !!!
it’s obvious you think i’m naive, but puh-lease. a person with an IQ greater than a hammer could have seen your implications a mile away. you were caught in a fallacious argument. Deal with it.
field marshall - i’ve many times wondered about the passages you quoted. There are others - the book of Job where God meets with his “sons”, and Romans where Paul refers to other "g"ods ("we know that there are other gods . . . "). I seriously consider that there are other celestial beings other than angels . . . kind of a la polytheistic religions. It would not surprise me to at the end of it all find that there is some kind of a pantheon out there that provides the fodder for all of the myths (not too say i yet believe in it). The important thing for Christians is that there is one "G"od - creator/saviour, etc.
I see you what saying, however, people do not routinely rise for the grave, its not something that happens in the world we know. People do not walk on water and turn water into wine.
There is plenty of evidence to support that the above does not happen.
Poeple who wish to see UFOs usually claim they do.
If you chose to belive something enough and want to convice others, who knows what you’ll do.
All the porphecies about Jesus, as writing in the bible, came true. correct well that right there makes me wonder.
The Napoleonic war history does nothing that defies my sense of logic, so its easy to accept the general facts about that time period.
It Napoleon’s history was covered in stories of how he was walking on water, rising his soldiers from the dead and was born of immaculate conception, I wouldn’t belive it either.
it’s obvious you think i’m naive, but puh-lease. a person with an IQ greater than a hammer could have seen your implications a mile away. you were caught in a fallacious argument. Deal with it.
That was a question without implication, i am still asking why so many scientist cannot see god. Is it a new way to find excuse not to answer ? You are making paranoiac extrapolation, i never use this kind of fallacies.
Anyway what implication, that all scientist are atheist ? You and I know it is false…
@Mr:
I see you what saying, however, people do not routinely rise for the grave, its not something that happens in the world we know. People do not walk on water and turn water into wine.
There is plenty of evidence to support that the above does not happen.Poeple who wish to see UFOs usually claim they do.
If you chose to belive something enough and want to convice others, who knows what you’ll do.All the porphecies about Jesus, as writing in the bible, came true. correct well that right there makes me wonder.
The Napoleonic war history does nothing that defies my sense of logic, so its easy to accept the general facts about that time period.
It Napoleon’s history was covered in stories of how he was walking on water, rising his soldiers from the dead and was born of immaculate conception, I wouldn’t belive it either.
Fair enough. So in your mind, the fact that these miracles are listed in the bible are evidence that the whole thing is a corrupt myth? Or part myth/some history? Or interesting literature piece (except for the book of Numbers and Leviticus)?
