Non-Circular reasons for believing in the Bible.

[help3434]

I often see people quote Bible verses about scripture when asked why they believe in the Bible. Of course arguing that the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true is circular. Are there any non-circular reasons for believing in the Bible?

[1213]

I am not making this interpretation up. See: http://biologos.org/blog/the-firmament- ... -the-point
and
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hil ... nt-wtj.pdf

I think that interpretation is wrong.

I think firmament describes earth that was expanded from below water and it formed dry land as pictured in following link.
http://www.kolumbus.fi/r.berg/geology.html

Why do you think that it is possible? Is it because the Bible says this happened? Why do you believe the Bible?

I think it is possible, because we have no proof that it is not possible.

I believe the Bible, because in my opinion it seems to be correct about everything it claims. Atheist dry hard to refute it, but they have failed so badly that I think the Bible must be true.

[1213]

I take it you also believe God magically kept plant-life alive for a day before deciding to create the sun. God sure did things backward back then.

It is possible that plants were only seeds, before sun and first rain.

[Justin108]

I take it you also believe God magically kept plant-life alive for a day before deciding to create the sun. God sure did things backward back then.

It is possible that plants were only seeds, before sun and first rain.

Genesis 1:11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.�

As you can see, they were already trees when God made them. I find it terribly sad how you cling on to anything to attempt to rationalize the Bible. This just shows that no matter how ridiculous the claims of the Bible, you will find a way to reason to yourself how that somehow makes sense. You decided the Bible is true and no matter how much reason we forcefeed you, you will keep sticking to the Bible. Reason be damned.

[Jacob Simonsky]

I don't but my interpretation suits my correlation with Occam's Razor

Oh hell no. Your interpretation is needlessly complex, appealing to deep metaphorical nonsense. Occam's Razor would say Moses was simply wrong about Genesis. Much simpler.



Also you missed a question I asked regarding your claim to all religions holding the truth... but I'll ask again;

Judaism says there is one god. Hinduism says there are many. Who is right? Who is wrong?

Believe as you will...

You keep missing my question. I'll try again.

Judaism says there is one god. Hinduism says there are many. Who is right? Who is wrong?

Both are correct. It is only here on earth that people quibble over such irrelevancies. I refuse to think or speak in divisive terms because I try to live the inclusiveness that all religions attempt to teach.

You will not like my answer but it's about time you stop arguing and begin to develop the ability to accept that yours is not the only mind in the universe.

Peace to you younger brother...

So there is only one god...and there is more than one god...? Have you ever heard of the law of noncontradiction?

As for asking me to stop arguing... You do know this is a debate forum, right?

Sure it's a debate forum but I don't care about convincing you of anything. You remember that.

You are of tender years friend and it is to be expected that you will not be able to appreciate higher concepts. In a half century or so you will think differently.

[Justin108]

I don't but my interpretation suits my correlation with Occam's Razor

Oh hell no. Your interpretation is needlessly complex, appealing to deep metaphorical nonsense. Occam's Razor would say Moses was simply wrong about Genesis. Much simpler.



Also you missed a question I asked regarding your claim to all religions holding the truth... but I'll ask again;

Judaism says there is one god. Hinduism says there are many. Who is right? Who is wrong?

Believe as you will...

You keep missing my question. I'll try again.

Judaism says there is one god. Hinduism says there are many. Who is right? Who is wrong?

Both are correct. It is only here on earth that people quibble over such irrelevancies. I refuse to think or speak in divisive terms because I try to live the inclusiveness that all religions attempt to teach.

You will not like my answer but it's about time you stop arguing and begin to develop the ability to accept that yours is not the only mind in the universe.

Peace to you younger brother...

So there is only one god...and there is more than one god...? Have you ever heard of the law of noncontradiction?

As for asking me to stop arguing... You do know this is a debate forum, right?

Sure it's a debate forum but I don't care about convincing you of anything. You remember that.

You are of tender years friend and it is to be expected that you will not be able to appreciate higher concepts. In a half century or so you will think differently.

I don't see what my age has to do with anything. Despite being 50 years younger than you, you seem significantly less capable of grasping the laws of logic as is apparent in your claim to epistemic relativism. The laws of noncontradiction is enough to destroy your whole perspective. This is a debate forum. I am here to debate. If you want to discuss doctrine and compare notes, I don't think Apologetics is the right subforum for you.

[Jacob Simonsky]

I don't see what my age has to do with anything. Despite being 50 years younger than you, you seem significantly less capable of grasping the laws of logic as is apparent in your claim to epistemic relativism. The laws of noncontradiction is enough to destroy your whole perspective. This is a debate forum. I am here to debate. If you want to discuss doctrine and compare notes, I don't think Apologetics is the right subforum for you.[/quote]


laws of logic
epistemic relativism
laws of noncontradiction

These are typical of the things that are heard in academic circles. I give them little importance. When advancing a belief I will happily make a few attempts to help the reader to understand but only a few. A time comes when debating becomes a burden instead of a pleasure.

When we are young we perceive the world through a relatively narrow window. As we grow older and wisdoms accrue that aperture grows wider. We now are able to perceive much broader vistas in understanding. This is what I mean when I make reference to your age. It is apparent that you do not yet have sufficient experience.

If the above has not occurred to you it would explain why you ask: "I don't see what my age has to do with....."

BTW below your avatar appears: "Under Probation". Was this your idea or have you drawn the attention of the moderators? Perhaps others have thought you a bit too demanding?

Justin108 at this point I am taking charge of this exchange. You will be added to my "ignore list" for a while until you decide to be a little less pesky. You may PM me with your response if you care to.

[Justin108]

laws of logic
epistemic relativism
laws of noncontradiction

These are typical of the things that are heard in academic circles. I give them little importance. When advancing a belief I will happily make a few attempts to help the reader to understand but only a few. A time comes when debating becomes a burden instead of a pleasure.

When we are young we perceive the world through a relatively narrow window. As we grow older and wisdoms accrue that aperture grows wider. We now are able to perceive much broader vistas in understanding. This is what I mean when I make reference to your age. It is apparent that you do not yet have sufficient experience.

If the above has not occurred to you it would explain why you ask: "I don't see what my age has to do with....."

BTW below your avatar appears: "Under Probation". Was this your idea or have you drawn the attention of the moderators? Perhaps others have thought you a bit too demanding?

Justin108 at this point I am taking charge of this exchange. You will be added to my "ignore list" for a while until you decide to be a little less pesky. You may PM me with your response if you care to.

Appeals to my age, ignoring half of my posts and not basing anything on reason. I really don't mind being placed on your ignore list.

[1213]

Genesis 1:11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.�

As you can see, they were already trees when God made them. I find it terribly sad how you cling on to anything to attempt to rationalize the Bible. This just shows that no matter how ridiculous the claims of the Bible, you will find a way to reason to yourself how that somehow makes sense. You decided the Bible is true and no matter how much reason we forcefeed you, you will keep sticking to the Bible. Reason be damned.

And that can be true, even if it started by producing first only the seeds. And following scripture shows in my opinion that plants were created first as seeds and they didn’t yet grow, until first rain.

No plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung up; for Yahweh God had not caused it to rain on the earth. There was not a man to till the ground,
Genesis 2:5

[help3434]

[Replying to post 97 by 1213]

What makes you think that it is possible for the Earth to be formed before the sun? Why do you believe the Bible?

[Iam]

Genesis 1:11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.�

As you can see, they were already trees when God made them. I find it terribly sad how you cling on to anything to attempt to rationalize the Bible. This just shows that no matter how ridiculous the claims of the Bible, you will find a way to reason to yourself how that somehow makes sense. You decided the Bible is true and no matter how much reason we forcefeed you, you will keep sticking to the Bible. Reason be damned.

And that can be true, even if it started by producing first only the seeds. And following scripture shows in my opinion that plants were created first as seeds and they didn’t yet grow, until first rain.

No plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung up; for Yahweh God had not caused it to rain on the earth. There was not a man to till the ground,
Genesis 2:5

According to some that was the flood. I love it when you guys try to argue logically.