Why no straight answers?

[Zzyzx]

.
After eight years debating here I have YET to encounter a defender of fundamentalism / literalism / traditionalism (or the Bible in general) who will openly, accurately, honestly answer fundamental questions about Christian beliefs – including the following (with truthful answers in bold font)

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that:

Jesus was anything more than human? None

Humans possess a soul? None

An afterlife exists? None

Miracles described in Bible tales actually occurred? None

Any of the claimed events such as floods, earthquakes, darkening sky, star stopping, Earth ceasing rotation, etc occurred as described? None

God intercedes in human affairs or life events? None

Bible writers were actually inspired by God? None



Why no answers? Could it be refusal to admit that in the absence of verifiable information, accepting the basic beliefs of Christianity must be based on "Take my (or his) word for it" and that doing so is not a rational basis for making decisions on matters of importance?

[Hamsaka]

[Replying to post 23 by Hamsaka]

Jesus is not known to most of the people alive today on Planet Earth, except perhaps in a comparative religion course in Uttar Pradesh (university in India). Your response is Christian-o-centric, and is not 'true' beyond Christianity.

I am pretty sure the majority of the world knows of Jesus, by the age of five even. I would be willing to bet if you asked a 100 eight year olds who Jesus was , they would all know , the main answer would be God. My response is absolutely true . I would imagine by adulthood all would know who Jesus is. The impression left on humanity goes beyond human understanding , this answers the question. This is without question .

The only way to 'see who is right' is to conduct a world-wide poll 'Do you know who Jesus is?" and look at the results. In the meantime, we have the Pew Institute, a group that conducts polls about religion around the world. Christianity comprises 2.2 billion people, out of 7 billion. 1.2 million of those Christians are Catholic, therefore not really Christian in some Christian's minds. The other 5.8 billion (well over 2/3 of the total population) have different religions to believe in. It is from that that I say many, many do not know Jesus and for understandable reasons.

I've been raised to believe I have a soul or spirit that manifests . . . somewhere, in my body, just around it . . .? I even 'like' the idea, to be honest, but I'm imaginative to a fault. When it gets right down to it, a spirit or soul cannot be shown to exist, in the manner we are able to show that other things exist -- including immaterial things. So far, it appears to be a faith-based belief rather than something that actually exists.

We have souls , there is no question. Your consciousness is your soul. This is part of what gives you the will to go on. We have a life force beyond the physical. We have an inner self. This is a soul. You are aware of this inner self, the same as you are aware of your surroundings. We all are aware of our inner self.

When a man or woman displays illogical human strength say to lift a car , or a tree , that normally they could not budge, to save someone's life. This is surely being powered by that life force that resides in all of us, as this could not be repeated under normal circumstances, showing that this force can manifest itself in the physical when the need arises. One would wonder what your aura would look like under these circumstances.

You can believe what makes the most sense to you. When asked to define 'soul', people will give a variety of different answers. I've not heard of the 'soul' as the source of superhuman strength in times of danger, so that's a new one. I'm familiar with the concept, very familiar.

My problem with the veracity of the 'soul' is that basing major life choices on bad premises tends to cause bad consequences. It doesn't seem like much harm could come from a person wanting to believe they have a soul though, does it?

Except when a pro-life organization insists a human blastocyst has a 'soul' at the moment of conception (unsupported scripturally, btw, as well as in all the other ways). Or when the 'soul' of a witch is saved by burning him or her at the stake. Even something as simple as a belief in a soul has caused much additional human suffering. That's why I don't accept there is a soul or spirit -- I don't like to start out with bad premises (or wrong ones, incomplete ones, etc).

Why? Was the basis of Jesus' message and life about making sure you get to the Afterlife? I realize how important this idea is to Christians, and that of all the doctrines, may be the one most counted on by Christians to help them make sense of and tolerate the bad things that happen to everyone.

The reason why is because there would no longer be a need for faith. Christianity is a faith based religion , take the need for faith away , then the whole basis of being a Christian becomes moot.

Those who come into the faith for the sole purpose of eternal life , would more then likely not be written into the "book of life" . This is not what it is about. .e.g

A serial,killer is evil up until the day of his execution . That day he decides to get saved , sorry , does not work that way. This would be insincerity at the highest. This would be a selfish act .

Some pastors would disagree here , but I can tell you , the lord is all about sincerity. The Christian God demands it.

The reason for the afterlife is to reunite with God , to walk in his glory, not just about immortality . This " walk" is beyond our understanding , as far as what " plane " we will reside in. Hell could be nothingness vs your soul being accepted by God and brought into his realm , or state of being .

Re: what I put in bold. When I read that the basis of Jesus' message is to uphold the necessity of 'faith', I have to ask what is so vitally important about faith? And what is the purpose of perpetuating something that will immediately fall apart in the absence of faith?

Anyway, I'm going to say that not all Christians would agree their religion is 'moot' without the doctrine of an afterlife. Perhaps this is true for you, as is Jesus being the most significant human being (or part human) person to have walked the earth

What I have stated above should clear this up for you. The doctrine is not just about the immortality , the doctrine is about how having faith, that should you believe , then you are saved. One must have faith to be saved , should Zzyzyx get his " proof" and not believe until then , faith would become a moot point at that point.

Wouldn't you agree ?

I would, and I just go a step further. If the doctrine depends upon faith to preserve and support it else it becomes moot, perhaps it is already moot? Or should be?

[Faithful One]

[Replying to post 51 by Hamsaka]

The other 5.8 billion (well over 2/3 of the total population) have different religions to believe in. It is from that that I say many, many do not know Jesus and for understandable reasons.

This does not mean they do not know of Jesus . I would say it is almost unavoidable in most societies.

You can believe what makes the most sense to you. When asked to define 'soul', people will give a variety of different answers. I've not heard of the 'soul' as the source of superhuman strength in times of danger, so that's a new one. I'm familiar with the concept, very familiar.

This is to illustrate bringing out the strength from within yourself , that transcends the physical strength. The life force that resides in you gives you this ability.

Except when a pro-life organization insists a human blastocyst has a 'soul' at the moment of conception (unsupported scripturally, btw, as well as in all the other ways). Or when the 'soul' of a witch is saved by burning him or her at the stake. Even something as simple as a belief in a soul has caused much additional human suffering. That's why I don't accept there is a soul or spirit -- I don't like to start out with bad premises (or wrong ones, incomplete ones, etc).

The soul is an obvious thing. The time a soul is matched with a physical being is unknown. I would imagine when one becomes aware of themselves is when a soul would come to be . The body is but a vessel to have a shell for the soul.

The lack of a fulfilled soul is what causes suffering. The soul must be nurtured through giving , self sacrifice, atonement , you will fill your soul with joy and love through these processes . One could have a " good soul ", one could have a " grave soul", one could have a " tortured soul". The way you nurture this inner self , decides the condition of your soul.

Re: what I put in bold. When I read that the basis of Jesus' message is to uphold the necessity of 'faith', I have to ask what is so vitally important about faith? And what is the purpose of perpetuating something that will immediately fall apart in the absence of faith?

Faith is vitally important because it shows a belief in the word of God without being provided physical evidence of a God. This belief in the message of salvation creates devotion to God. Devotion to God is a necessity for salvation. Faith assures sincerity. Sincerity is another vital component for salvation. i.e

The derivatives of faith are the reason for faith. These derivatives equal Gods favor. These are holy perpetuations of faith. This will not create a "falling apart", when faith is no longer needed, as this will be a reuniting where the need for faith in God as a human being will no longer be necessary , you will know he is . , simply that he is, then worship and an anointing would come into play .

I would, and I just go a step further. If the doctrine depends upon faith to preserve and support it else it becomes moot, perhaps it is already moot? Or should be?

Far from it , the day that Jesus returns , if you believe, is the day your faith in God will be rewarded. The purpose of faith is not to preserve the "doctrine ", or to "support" it , the purpose of faith is to preserve and support your soul. Should you have faith, you are already preserving and supporting it , but you depend on the word , the word does not depend on you . The word saves you , if you believe in the word of God.

[Hamsaka]

[Replying to post 51 by Hamsaka]

The other 5.8 billion (well over 2/3 of the total population) have different religions to believe in. It is from that that I say many, many do not know Jesus and for understandable reasons.

This does not mean they do not know of Jesus . I would say it is almost unavoidable in most societies.

You can believe what makes the most sense to you. When asked to define 'soul', people will give a variety of different answers. I've not heard of the 'soul' as the source of superhuman strength in times of danger, so that's a new one. I'm familiar with the concept, very familiar.

This is to illustrate bringing out the strength from within yourself , that transcends the physical strength. The life force that resides in you gives you this ability.

That strength within us is there whether or not we believe there's a soul or spirit, or faith (in whatever), for that matter. Attributing extraordinary examples of human strength to the 'soul' is arbitrary, another example of how the 'soul' can be defined as anything the person wants it to be. That isn't the problem (a person believing whatever they want). The problem is when people ACT on those ambiguous, subjective beliefs as though they were factual. Mostly, the results are further confusion on behalf of the confused individual -- but some religionists go steps further and make their arbitrary and ambiguous (not to mention unverifiable) beliefs into laws other people have to abide by (like my example with human blastocysts above). I'm not saying you do this Just mentioning it as something that does happen.

I think I know what you mean, what you are referring to -- the qualities we suddenly develop in a bad situation that 'save the day'. I don't see these qualities of extraordinary bravery or courage ONLY happening to people who believe in a soul, or belief Jesus is their personal savior, and that's just the start of a long list. Those are HUMAN qualities, first, long before we tried to understand what they were, and how to make them happen more often.

[1213]

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that:

Maybe it is because of the same reason why we don’t have any verifiable evidence beyond “scientists� explanations that all species developed as the theory of evolution claims?

[Faithful One]

[Replying to post 53 by Hamsaka]

That strength within us is there whether or not we believe there's a soul or spirit, or faith (in whatever), for that matter. Attributing extraordinary examples of human strength to the 'soul' is arbitrary, another example of how the 'soul' can be defined as anything the person wants it to be.

I do not believe so , this transcends the physical laws of nature. This shows The fortitude of a mighty soul. This is coming form within , not from outside forces. I am giving you concise examples of realizing your inner self. I am giving you physical examples of where your soul could possibly reside within you. There is no doubt of your consciousness , your inner voice , your inner self , your soul.

Your self awareness that you can not see is your soul. How you nurture this inner self is on you . Will you make the right decisions and it will transcend the physical after you pass , will it still be a life force , only on a different plane that is awaiting us ? Will hell be nothingness and your inner self , just simply ceases to exist ?

[Faithful One]

[Replying to post 54 by 1213]

Maybe it is because of the same reason why we don’t have any verifiable evidence beyond “scientists� explanations that all species developed as the theory of evolution claims?

Atheists are forever asking for evidence. Could not link to your source .

[DanieltheDragon]

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that:

Maybe it is because of the same reason why we don’t have any verifiable evidence beyond “scientists� explanations that all species developed as the theory of evolution claims?

except we do and you can. There is a large variety of simple experiments you can do yourself to verify this. You can also examine all of the research papers made in the last century and check their work if you have the time(it could take a while there are volumes but it is doable).

No I think the only people that make this claim are only the ones who don't want to verify it. Because you can and those that make this claim have a vested interest in not verifying it.

you don't have to take their conclusions on the matter you can just examine the data.

[Zzyzx]

.

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that:

Jesus was anything more than human? None

Humans possess a soul? None

An afterlife exists? None

Miracles described in Bible tales actually occurred? None

Any of the claimed events such as floods, earthquakes, darkening sky, star stopping, Earth ceasing rotation, etc occurred as described? None

God intercedes in human affairs or life events? None

Bible writers were actually inspired by God? None

Maybe it is because of the same reason why we don’t have any verifiable evidence beyond “scientists� explanations that all species developed as the theory of evolution claims?

Nice dodge. Notice that the question does NOT ask why there is no evidence. It asks what evidence exists?

Do you acknowledge that no verifiable evidence exists for any of the above Bible tales?

Why try to switch the subject to evolution? Is that to avoid addressing the lack of verifiable evidence to support Bible tales?

Can you (generic term – open invitation) supply verifiable evidence to support Bible tales that is equal to or greater than that to support the contention that evolution occurs?

1. The universal genetic code. All cells on Earth, from our white blood cells, to simple bacteria, to cells in the leaves of trees, are capable of reading any piece of DNA from any life form on Earth. This is very strong evidence for a common ancestor from which all life descended.


2. The fossil record. The fossil record shows that the simplest fossils will be found in the oldest rocks, and it can also show a smooth and gradual transition from one form of life to another.

3. Genetic commonalities. Human beings have approximately 96% of genes in common with chimpanzees, about 90% of genes in common with cats (source), 80% with cows (source), 75% with mice (source), and so on. This does not prove that we evolved from chimpanzees or cats, though, only that we shared a common ancestor in the past. And the amount of difference between our genomes corresponds to how long ago our genetic lines diverged.


4. Common traits in embryos. Humans, dogs, snakes, fish, monkeys, eels (and many more life forms) are all considered "chordates" because we belong to the phylum Chordata. One of the features of this phylum is that, as embryos, all these life forms have gill slits, tails, and specific anatomical structures involving the spine. For humans (and other non-fish) the gill slits reform into the bones of the ear and jaw at a later stage in development. But, initially, all chordate embryos strongly resemble each other.

In fact, pig embryos are often dissected in biology classes because of how similar they look to human embryos. These common characteristics could only be possible if all members of the phylum Chordata descended from a common ancestor.

5. Bacterial resistance to antibiotics. Bacteria colonies can only build up a resistance to antibiotics through evolution. It is important to note that in every colony of bacteria, there are a tiny few individuals which are naturally resistant to certain antibiotics. This is because of the random nature of mutations.

When an antibiotic is applied, the initial innoculation will kill most bacteria, leaving behind only those few cells which happen to have the mutations necessary to resist the antibiotics. In subsequent generations, the resistant bacteria reproduce, forming a new colony where every member is resistant to the antibiotic. This is natural selection in action. The antibiotic is "selecting" for organisms which are resistant, and killing any that are not.
http://evolutionfaq.com/articles/five-proofs-evolution

If anyone is still unaware (or in denial) of #5 above, genetic development of antibiotic resistance (evolution – genetic change through generations) they might consult:

The Missouri Department of Health explains it this way: "Every time a person takes antibiotics, sensitive bacteria are killed, but resistant germs may be left to grow and multiply. Repeated and improper uses of antibiotics are primary causes of the increase in drug-resistant bacteria."

Some bad bacteria are naturally resistant to certain types of antibiotics, according to Tufts University. Others can become resistant by spontaneous genetic mutation or by swapping genes with other bugs.

So the CDC is ranking the worst drug-resistant bacteria according to how many people get sick, the number of hospitalizations and the number of deaths caused by each. They also took into account how many, if any, existing antibiotics still work on the bacteria.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/health/an ... index.html

Do non-scientific (or anti-science) Christians understand more about the above than those worldwide who spend decades studying the subjects? What is their criteria for dismissing or demeaning the work of "scientists"?

Back to the OP – "What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate [Bible tales]?

Since there is none, why not openly and honestly say so rather than injecting fancy footwork and diversionary tactics? Is refusal to acknowledge truth (lack of verifiable evidence to support Bible tales) required to defend religious beliefs?

If any position I held was contradicted by convergence of verifiable evidence from numerous, disconnected, worldwide experts in the field I would modify my position to be in keeping with the best information available.

[Faithful One]

[Replying to post 58 by Zzyzx]

Do you acknowledge that no verifiable evidence exists for any of the above Bible tales?

Even God would agree there is no verifiable evidence of him, that is the whole point of faith.

Since there is none, why not openly and honestly say so rather than injecting fancy footwork and diversionary tactics? Is refusal to acknowledge truth (lack of verifiable evidence to support Bible tales) required to defend religious beliefs?

You are confused , verification is not necessary . There is also not a need to defend any religious belief, nor any requirements to defend them.
:

If anyone is still unaware (or in denial) of #5 above, genetic development of antibiotic resistance (evolution – genetic change through generations) they might consult:

What exactly is your point here ? See Hebrews 11:3 . Figure it out from there , the bible does not deny , what I think your point is .

You have no direct links to prove your theory. Period. Your snarkiness is truly not appreciated , as others here , you seem jaded , by the way you phrase your statements, but that is par for the course to me .

[OnceConvinced]

Your snarkiness is truly not appreciated , as others here , you seem jaded , by the way you phrase your statements, but that is par for the course to me .

Moderator Warning


This is nothing but a personal attack and demonstrates the same attitude you are accusing of Zzyzx. If you feel that his post is in any way uncivil or violating the rules of this forum please report it.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.