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?

[Dropship]

In 13 years of internet debating, I've never yet seen an atheist or nonchristian give a plausible answer to the question- "What would have been the Bible writers MOTIVE for making it all up?"
Instead they simply chant the mantra below over and over again (yawn)..

Genesis- LIES!
Exodus- LIES!
Leviticus- LIES!
Numbers- LIES!
Deuteronomy-LIES!
Joshua- LIES!
Judges-LIES!
Ruth-LIES!
1 Samuel-LIES!
2 Samuel- LIES!
1 Kings- LIES!
2 Kings- LIES!
1 Chronicles-LIES!
2 Chronicles-LIES!
Ezra- LIES!
Nehemiah-LIES!
Esther-LIES!
Job-LIES!
Psalms-LIES!
Proverbs-LIES!
Ecclesiastes-LIES!
Song of Solomon-LIES!
Isaiah-LIES!
Jeremiah-LIES!
Lamentations-LIES!
Ezekiel- LIES!
Daniel- LIES!
Hosea- LIES!
Joel-LIES!
Amos-LIES!
Obadiah-LIES!
Jonah-LIES!
Micah-LIES!
Nahum-LIES!
Habakkuk-LIES!
Zephaniah-LIES!
Haggai-LIES!
Zecharia-LIES!
Malachi-LIES!
Matthew-LIES!
Mark-LIES!
Luke-LIES!
John- LIES!
The Acts-LIES!
Romans-LIES!
1 Corinthians-LIES!
2 Corinthians- LIES!
Galatians-LIES!
Ephesians- LIES!
Phillipians-LIES!
Colossians-LIES!
1 Thessalonians-LIES!
2 Thessalonians-LIES!
1 Timothy-LIES!
2 Timothy-LIES!
Titus-LIES!
Philemon- LIES!
Hebrews- LIES!
James-LIES!
1 Peter-LIES!
2 Peter- LIES!
1 John- LIES!
2 John-LIES!
3 John-LIES!
Jude-LIES!
Revelation-LIES!

[Paprika]

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Roman tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that Julius Caesar was stabbed by a team of conspirators?

Why no answers? Could it be refusal to admit that in the absence of verifiable information, accepting this basic belief about Roman history must be based on "Take my (or his) word for it"?

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

Perhaps these things are not subject to empirical verification.

They do not, however mean they are not "real" ...most are transcendant and have to be taken on faith.

Some things, like the existance of God Himself, the existance of a soul, or the existance of an afterlife are unverifable by the Scientific Method. And so far cannot be proven or disproven one way or another.

Other things, such as stories of particular miracles, are pretty much unrepeated and unrepeatable, at least in modern times, and fall into the mythic category of "Once Upon a Time"

Does not mean they have no value, myths can and do point to deeper, "poetic" (to avoid the disputed term Spiritual") truths and can and do inspire.

[acapiz]

Why no straight answers, indeed, Z.
I have asked Elijah John directly for the simplest of explanations without success, on my thread , God's Gone. It is at a point where if I ask again I might be accused of 'badgering'. If you ask me a question I will attempt to answer it. Why not with something you declare to be a strong belief of yours. I do not get it. Why be on a debate site, if you cherry pick your pastries??? I was watching a programme about congestion at Mumbai's central railway station, (1 million commuters per day) How can anyone feel too precious in this ant like existence of 2015. Why not declare that one is going to believe what one likes and that one does not give a toss about what other people think. Get off this stage and get on facebook. IMHO (1 billion logons daily) One can cherry pick to one's hearts content there. What do you think, Z?

The second post on this thread is as 'watery' as any I have ever seen.

Elijah John: They do not, however mean they are not "real" ...most are transcendant and have to be taken on faith

Most non believers get this, EJ. What we are looking for is, (as I requested earlier), a clear logic, a progression, a target, a reality within action, an agenda , a...................

The fact is that a billion people believing in Google would do just as well as a billion people believing in God. Why is that??? You answer that if you can, Paprika. You appear to debate, just to debate. Show us something good!

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 5 by acapiz]

I admitted many times that many of these things are not "provable"..the fact that you may not have accepted my answers, nor agreed with them does not mean they were in any way evasive.

I am merely trying to point out that there are other ways of "knowing" and to you I say that this is not a science site...though science enters into many of the topics.

If you want to debate me about the MEANING of a particular verse of Scripture, then have at it, but though you may not agree, does not mean that the answer was not direct.

Or are you suggesting that because I often try to point out deeper meanings, that I don't have any place on a debating site? Because I do not take a hard, scientific skeptical view of matters of the heart and soul?

Because I DON"T take a pure atheistic or Fundamentalist pov, that there are no other acceptable approaches to a given question?

[Paprika]

The fact is that a billion people believing in Google would do just as well as a billion people believing in God. Why is that??? You answer that if you can, Paprika.

This is my answer to that 'fact': "asserted, but not demonstrated".

You appear to debate, just to debate.

If that is true it means that I'm hardly different in that respect from many non-theists here.

Show us something good!

Meh.

[Hamsaka]

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Roman tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that Julius Caesar was stabbed by a team of conspirators?

Why no answers? Could it be refusal to admit that in the absence of verifiable information, accepting this basic belief about Roman history must be based on "Take my (or his) word for it"?

I'll take your word for what you say you ate for lunch yesterday, because eating lunch is not an extraordinary feat. I'll look at you askance if you claim you flew from LA to Newark airport after you ate lunch.

The assassination or attempt to it of a Roman emperor is not as prosaic as 'what Paprika ate for lunch yesterday', but it is still not particularly extraordinary, like you flying across the US.

The OP gives a list of crucially extraordinary claims lacking any evidential support whatsoever. Your question is not relevant to the topic, and could be described as a typical dodge, a category fallacy, and answering a question with another question in hopes of shifting the heat away from an honest answer.

[Paprika]

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Roman tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that Julius Caesar was stabbed by a team of conspirators?

Why no answers? Could it be refusal to admit that in the absence of verifiable information, accepting this basic belief about Roman history must be based on "Take my (or his) word for it"?

I'll take your word for what you say you ate for lunch yesterday, because eating lunch is not an extraordinary feat. I'll look at you askance if you claim you flew from LA to Newark airport after you ate lunch.

The assassination or attempt to it of a Roman emperor is not as prosaic as 'what Paprika ate for lunch yesterday', but it is still not particularly extraordinary, like you flying across the US.

The OP gives a list of crucially extraordinary claims lacking any evidential support whatsoever. Your question is not relevant to the topic, and could be described as a typical dodge, a category fallacy, and answering a question with another question in hopes of shifting the heat away from an honest answer.

See? No straight answers.

What 'verifiable evidence' of such a alleged 'ordinary' historical event in ancient history, (with no physical evidence remaining (eg monuments)) can be produced when all the sources are ruled out? None.

And yet even though such alleged 'ordinary' events can't been proven or supported by 'verifiable evidence' under '"no sources allowed" conditions' you demand that others prove alleged 'extraordinary' events (eg. the resurrection) in such a fashion. What a hoot.

[Elijah John]

I like the maxim "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". The fact that Jesus may well have existed, falls within (or close to) ordinary historical claims.

To say that Jesus is God Himself is quite another thing. That is an EXTRAORDINARY claim that a man can be Almighty God.

(Even the Bible indicates that Jesus was not Almighty)

The "proof" offered by Trinitarian, Pauline and Johannine theologians are not convincing, imo.

And as I indicated in my previous post on this thread, the topics of the existance of God himself, the existance of a Soul, or of an afterlife fall into different categories than do the supposed Divinity of Jesus, or Biblical accounts of particular miracles.