Help: How do I know that your God is the one, true God?

[Kir Komrik]

Hi all,
I'm new here and have just read up on the policies and finished my signature, etc. I hope I've done everything correctly so far.
I would like to believe in an almighty power but the problem is that in my research I've found so many gods out there. Coming from a family that has been explicitly atheist for generations, I'm starting from scratch and am looking at all religions.
I am sincerely curious to know how would I know, for instance, that your god is the one, true God?
Thank you.

[Zetesis Apistia]

There are two works that are referred to in scripture that must have been lost to time. The book of Jasher and the book of Enoch. The book of Jasher exists today, but how much it has been corrupted through translation is not known. Apparently these books were part of Judaism because they are both referenced in the bible.

Which makes my point. You have nothing dating to the dates you gave. The book of Jasher is not referenced in the bible. The book of the just or yasher is however. Jasher comes from hayashar, or the upright and just.

No word games please. I only know that old testament writers referenced it. I have no idea how old it was, only that they were referencing it.

There are some discrepancies as to the date of Jasher, but Enoch lived around 3500 b.c. If he wrote anything, and apparently he did, because there is a reference quote from him in Jude, then his writing would have to be around 5500 years. You may dispute the claim, but what can you counter claim with?

We still have no text dating to thisntime frame. We have assumption that the referenced book is from this time, but we have no actual text.

Much of what we learn in history classes comes from fragments of works that have been lost to time, yet most of it is not questioned. For example. There are some extraordinary claims made by history teachers about Alexander the Great, yet we have no sources from his lifetime or even soon after his death. History teachers rely on fragments of two works that were compiled one hundred years after his death. In fact much of what we are taught about him is from historians that compiled their works between 300 to 500 years after his death. This is a very common practice when it comes to history because the fact is a lot of recorded history is lost over time. I have a very large book on my desk that supports my Christian beliefs and it dates back 3500 years.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 590:

Much of what we learn in history classes comes from fragments of works that have been lost to time, yet most of it is not questioned.

All I'm seeing is an argument from "y'all accept that claim, and I'm getting upset for ya not accepting mine".

Where an ancient declares a man existed, that's one thing, but when they say that man hopped up after being dead for a weekend, there's your trouble.

For example. There are some extraordinary claims made by history teachers about Alexander the Great, yet we have no sources from his lifetime or even soon after his death.

Please present which claim you consider so extraordinary so we can compare such to "extraordinary" biblical claims.

History teachers rely on fragments of two works that were compiled one hundred years after his death. In fact much of what we are taught about him is from historians that compiled their works between 300 to 500 years after his death. This is a very common practice when it comes to history because the fact is a lot of recorded history is lost over time.

Such oughta lead us to conclude we ought'n trust any ancient claim - regardless of how non-extraordinary, or non-non-extraordinary we think that claim to be.

have a very large book on my desk that supports my Christian beliefs and it dates back 3500 years.

I got a big'n says some dude made him a zoo with dinosaurs in it, and how that didn't turn out too well.

Such a condition should not lead us to conclude there's a tyrannosaur lurking on the corner of every street.

[Goat]

The bible has yet to be proved wrong. Many scientists have been though.

Please prove this statement. Clairify what you mean 'the bible has yet to be proved wrong'??

This seems to be one of those unsupported claims.

The bible is quite a large book. Which part do you want me to defend? Be specific?

Let's see..

I want you to show defend the claim for the world wide flood.

The Grand Canyon has marine fossils towards the top of the Grand Canyon, almost a mile above sea level. That is one bit of evidence that supports a worldwide flood.

really?? Prove it. Don't make a blanket statement,.. support that claim. how was the vairous marine fossils formed?? how were the dated? Show your work.

Can you show that this paper is incorrect?

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 592:

...
Can you show that this paper is incorrect?

Well, on page 3, it says they was digging in Pennsylvania and Mississippi.



I'll see myself to the door

[orthodox skeptic]

Hi all,
I'm new here and have just read up on the policies and finished my signature, etc. I hope I've done everything correctly so far.
I would like to believe in an almighty power but the problem is that in my research I've found so many gods out there. Coming from a family that has been explicitly atheist for generations, I'm starting from scratch and am looking at all religions.
I am sincerely curious to know how would I know, for instance, that your god is the one, true God?
Thank you.

I believe the answer is simple...father knows best!!

[Zetesis Apistia]

The bible has yet to be proved wrong. Many scientists have been though.

Please prove this statement. Clairify what you mean 'the bible has yet to be proved wrong'??

This seems to be one of those unsupported claims.

The bible is quite a large book. Which part do you want me to defend? Be specific?

Let's see..

I want you to show defend the claim for the world wide flood.

The Grand Canyon has marine fossils towards the top of the Grand Canyon, almost a mile above sea level. That is one bit of evidence that supports a worldwide flood.

really?? Prove it. Don't make a blanket statement,.. support that claim. how was the vairous marine fossils formed?? how were the dated? Show your work.

Can you show that this paper is incorrect?

Well now I suppose you would have your own ideas about how they got there but they are there and that is my point.

[Nickman]

The Grand Canyon has marine fossils towards the top of the Grand Canyon, almost a mile above sea level. That is one bit of evidence that supports a worldwide flood.

Do you have a knowledge of plate tectonics? When we see fosils of marine life on top of mountains and high natural forms, there are two things that are at work that allow for this. First, plate tectonics pushes lower and older rock formations to the surface. These formations have fossils in them that were once buried by layers upon layers of rock from the millions of years of sediment or surface dust. Erosion is the second factor which caused these fossils to become exposed. In the Grand Canyon we see both at work. The canyon is slowly lifted every year and as it is lifted erosion takes its course. The small Colorado River that runs through it actually carved the canyon. This was made possible by the constant uplifting every year via plate tectonics. When you lift the earth it allows for the river to cut through this newly exposed loose rock like a saw. Had there not been an uplifting there would be no canyon. Just like we see with other rivers that only dig down until they hit solid rock formations. Once solid rock is reached, erosion takes way too long to account for the Grand Canyon. The uplifting of the land via plate tectonics was the key. Erosion did the rest. What your left with is a rock layer, now on top, that was once buried deep under other rock layers. There was no flood.

[Zetesis Apistia]

The Grand Canyon has marine fossils towards the top of the Grand Canyon, almost a mile above sea level. That is one bit of evidence that supports a worldwide flood.

Do you have a knowledge of plate tectonics? When we see fosils of marine life on top of mountains and high natural forms, there are two things that are at work that allow for this. First, plate tectonics pushes lower and older rock formations to the surface. These formations have fossils in them that were once buried by layers upon layers of rock from the millions of years of sediment or surface dust. Erosion is the second factor which caused these fossils to become exposed. In the Grand Canyon we see both at work. The canyon is slowly lifted every year and as it is lifted erosion takes its course. The small Colorado River that runs through it actually carved the canyon. This was made possible by the constant uplifting every year via plate tectonics. When you lift the earth it allows for the river to cut through this newly exposed loose rock like a saw. Had there not been an uplifting there would be no canyon. Just like we see with other rivers that only dig down until they hit solid rock formations. Once solid rock is reached, erosion takes way too long to account for the Grand Canyon. The uplifting of the land via plate tectonics was the key. Erosion did the rest. What your left with is a rock layer, now on top, that was once buried deep under other rock layers. There was no flood.

So what about the marine fossils in the Sierras, the Swiss Alps, the Himalayas and many more mountains alike? Were not just talking about the
Grand canyon.

[Zetesis Apistia]

From Post 590:

Much of what we learn in history classes comes from fragments of works that have been lost to time, yet most of it is not questioned.

All I'm seeing is an argument from "y'all accept that claim, and I'm getting upset for ya not accepting mine".

My condolences

Where an ancient declares a man existed, that's one thing, but when they say that man hopped up after being dead for a weekend, there's your trouble.

What evidence do you have to support your belief?

For example. There are some extraordinary claims made by history teachers about Alexander the Great, yet we have no sources from his lifetime or even soon after his death.

Please present which claim you consider so extraordinary so we can compare such to "extraordinary" biblical claims.

So is that how you test historical claims? By comparing them to the bible?

History teachers rely on fragments of two works that were compiled one hundred years after his death. In fact much of what we are taught about him is from historians that compiled their works between 300 to 500 years after his death. This is a very common practice when it comes to history because the fact is a lot of recorded history is lost over time.

Such oughta lead us to conclude we ought'n trust any ancient claim - regardless of how non-extraordinary, or non-non-extraordinary we think that claim to be.

Well unless its the bible.

have a very large book on my desk that supports my Christian beliefs and it dates back 3500 years.

I got a big'n says some dude made him a zoo with dinosaurs in it, and how that didn't turn out too well.

Such a condition should not lead us to conclude there's a tyrannosaur lurking on the corner of every street.

[Nickman]

The Grand Canyon has marine fossils towards the top of the Grand Canyon, almost a mile above sea level. That is one bit of evidence that supports a worldwide flood.

Do you have a knowledge of plate tectonics? When we see fosils of marine life on top of mountains and high natural forms, there are two things that are at work that allow for this. First, plate tectonics pushes lower and older rock formations to the surface. These formations have fossils in them that were once buried by layers upon layers of rock from the millions of years of sediment or surface dust. Erosion is the second factor which caused these fossils to become exposed. In the Grand Canyon we see both at work. The canyon is slowly lifted every year and as it is lifted erosion takes its course. The small Colorado River that runs through it actually carved the canyon. This was made possible by the constant uplifting every year via plate tectonics. When you lift the earth it allows for the river to cut through this newly exposed loose rock like a saw. Had there not been an uplifting there would be no canyon. Just like we see with other rivers that only dig down until they hit solid rock formations. Once solid rock is reached, erosion takes way too long to account for the Grand Canyon. The uplifting of the land via plate tectonics was the key. Erosion did the rest. What your left with is a rock layer, now on top, that was once buried deep under other rock layers. There was no flood.

So what about the marine fossils in the Sierras, the Swiss Alps, the Himalayas and many more mountains alike? Were not just talking about the
Grand canyon.

The same thing happened there. The continents are all on plates or what we liken to plates which move freely on the molten rock which is 25 miles underneath. These plates meet up with other plates and we call this a fault line. At these fault lines is where most of our mountain ranges and volcanoes exist today. As two plates are pushing against each other one will start to go above the other while the other is forced down. This is a very long process. The Swiss Alps in northern Italy were actually created by the contact of the African plate. Geologists found rock formations on the top of the Swiss Alps that were only found in one other place, Africa. Further research has shown that the two continents were once grinding together which forced the Swiss Alps skyward. Once two plates are no longer pushing against each other, erosion gets the upper hand. This is why we see ancient fossil beds at the tops of mountain ranges. There was no flood. We have a full understanding of this. I suggest doing a little research and study about these things on websites dedicated to real science. Until then, here are the basics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Alps

http://library.thinkquest.org/10131/geology.html