Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Imnotspecial · 04-07-2009, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wooster

We have further evidence!

The only problem is that you and your fellow literalists refuse to accept it and without giving any sound reasoning or by the use of accepted science.

Every branch of science dealing with a topic touched by your claims, disagree with you, EVERY ONE OF THEM. But you refuse to accept this, you continue to tell us that we are all wrong and you are right no matter what we can demonstrate and what evidence we have. That is not very christian of you, is it?

If you told me that Jesus did not raise from the dead should I be a good Christian and believe you?

No, but you should at least start being skeptical of this claim!

Free Indeed · 04-07-2009, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by temporalillusion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

No, I don't see a problem. I start with the assumption that the Bible is true and authoritative in all matters then go from there. That is how in interpret evidences and observations. We all have to start somewhere.

Science starts with the observations and evidence and works from there to find the answer.

Because you already know the answer, there's no point in you asking any questions.

The flaw in your position is that there's no reason to believe the Bible is true and authoritative in all matters, and many reasons not to believe it.

The Bible is inaccurate historically, self contradictory and has changed a great deal over its history (as evidenced by the thousands of early fragments).

Your position basically boils down to "I believe this because I want to believe this".

Not necessarily. I believe because of faith yes at first, but I have lived my faith for a long time and know that I know that God is real. I've done scientific experiments to prove Him, I've put him to the test which is Biblical.

Free Indeed · 04-07-2009, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imnotspecial

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

If you told me that Jesus did not raise from the dead should I be a good Christian and believe you?

No, but you should at least start being skeptical of this claim!

I couldn't be a Christian in good consious if I was skeptical of that claim. That is the sum total of my faith. You could take away everything in the Bible and I would still be a Christian except for the resurrection.

show_no_mercy · 04-07-2009, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

I've done scientific experiments to prove Him, I've put him to the test which is Biblical.

LOL!

Where does it say to test god? Especially to scientifically test god? God is supposed to test you, not the other way around.

I am convinced you've never read a word in the bible if you think this!

Tom Sawyer · 04-07-2009, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Yes, but the start isn't supposed to be the end and have you not pay attention to anything inbetween.

Oh, I'm paying attention and see that a lot of your posts seem valid to the naked eye. And I can see how people believe what is said on here. And I will even admit that I don't have a rebuttle at this time for a lot of it. But that's mainly because of my failures and weaknesses, which I will try to improve. This isn't an 8th grade forum but I'm looking through arose colored glasses as in "He arose" and can see the falicies of the atheist position but have a hard time dealing with all the scientific distractions.

They're not scientific "distractions", they're scientific conclusions based on an analysis of the available evidence. The Bible's a nice story, but the claims made in it just plain do not match up to what's seen in the world, so those claims need to be dismissed as unreliable and inaccurate.

It's actually that simple.

Free Indeed · 04-07-2009, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

I've done scientific experiments to prove Him, I've put him to the test which is Biblical.

LOL!

Where does it say to test god? Especially to scientifically test god? God is supposed to test you, not the other way around.

I am convinced you've never read a word in the bible if you think this!

Gideon tested the Lord, the Bible says ask and you shall receive, the Bible says to try me and prove that I won't do what I say I do. Malachi 3:10 "prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts"

Martian Astronomer · 04-07-2009, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

I've done scientific experiments to prove Him, I've put him to the test which is Biblical.

LOL!

Where does it say to test god? Especially to scientifically test god? God is supposed to test you, not the other way around.

I am convinced you've never read a word in the bible if you think this!

He's probably referring to Gideon's "wet wool" challenge, or the Elijah and Mt. Carmel story. However, he seems to be forgetting the whole "Thou shall not put the Lord thy God to the test" thing. The bible is okay with testing God in some places, but definitely not okay with it in others.

...Plus, the above examples aren't exactly "repeatable," which kind of hurts the "scientific" aspect...

Tom Sawyer · 04-07-2009, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

LOL!

Where does it say to test god? Especially to scientifically test god? God is supposed to test you, not the other way around.

I am convinced you've never read a word in the bible if you think this!

Gideon tested the Lord, the Bible says ask and you shall receive, the Bible says to try me and prove that I won't do what I say I do. Malachi 3:10 "prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts"

What about Matthew 4:7 "Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test"?

Edit: Actually, I went to validate the quote and it turns out that the Matthew verse was Jesus quoting Deuteronomy 6:16

Free Indeed · 04-07-2009, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Oh, I'm paying attention and see that a lot of your posts seem valid to the naked eye. And I can see how people believe what is said on here. And I will even admit that I don't have a rebuttle at this time for a lot of it. But that's mainly because of my failures and weaknesses, which I will try to improve. This isn't an 8th grade forum but I'm looking through arose colored glasses as in "He arose" and can see the falicies of the atheist position but have a hard time dealing with all the scientific distractions.

They're not scientific "distractions", they're scientific conclusions based on an analysis of the available evidence. The Bible's a nice story, but the claims made in it just plain do not match up to what's seen in the world, so those claims need to be dismissed as unreliable and inaccurate.

It's actually that simple.

That's why scientists come to the same faith that I have, it's simple.

funinspace · 04-07-2009, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Indeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by temporalillusion

You have to assume?

Do you see how hollow your position is?

No, I don't see a problem. I start with the assumption that the Bible is true and authoritative in all matters then go from there. That is how I interpret evidences and observations. We all have to start somewhere.

It is understandable that a Christian might accept the Bible as true and authoratative in all matters of salvation, or in all matters of theology. I've noticed that many Christians are more nuanced than simply saying "authoritative in all matters". Most Christians don't seam to think that the Bible is trying to be a history book, or a geology book, or such. Personally, I found the below a relatively thoughtful comment:

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlongmire

When the Bible speaks of things concerning salvation (salvific), I become very particular about my interpretation and errancy suppositions.

Now, you refuse to entertain the notion that the earth and humans are more than 6,000 years old, ignoring even the vast majority of Christians opinion. Why do you think that the earth is not the center of the universe? It seams that is the simplest understanding from scripture. Why do you not think that the earth is flat since that is also the simplest understanding from scripture? Are you ignoring your Bible, in favor of your reasoning skills? How is this different than considering the earth is billions of years old?

A couple of the many examples:

Matt 4:1-12 The devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them"

The visions of my head as I lay in bed were these: I saw, and behold, a tree in the midst of the earth; and its height was great. The tree grew and became strong, and its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth. (Daniel 4:10-11)

"take the earth by the edges and shake the wicked out of it (Job 38:12-13)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.