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?

[Zzyzx]

.

Thank you " though "conclusive evidence" is not synonymous with "verifiable evidence"

There isnt any appreciable difference between the two. My point was that God is by definition supernatural; therefore, any natural attempts to verify Gods existence are pointless.

Gods are hypothetical " and are CLAIMED to be supernatural. Those who claim that one of the thousands of proposed "gods" IS supernatural are asked to demonstrate that they speak truthfully and accurately.

To many of us in debate verifiable evidence IS important " and do not consider "faith based" assertions to be of any merit in debate.

Okay " then why do you ask the same question over and over (e.g. What evidence is there that any theology is correct?)

I ask for evidence repeatedly when CLAIMS are made in debate.

Existence of BELIEFS is not questioned. Evidence of proposed entities IS questioned.

If since no conclusive proof of the existence of that entity exists then why ask for it for eight years?

Theists repeatedly make the claim " I repeatedly ask for evidence. If no claims are made I do not ask for evidence.

Why participate in any discussion on this board if that is how you start every discussion? Im just sayin

Questioning a member's motivation for participating is inappropriate. Assuming "that is how you start every discussion" is also inappropriate and is an incorrect assumption. Is that conclusion based on six days of membership?

"Might exist" is VERY different from "Does exist".

And that is how I phrase all of my statements " or I presuppose that everyone knows that my statements assume that a deity exists.

WHY assume that "everyone knows" your position? Even long-term members would be foolish to make that assumption. People do not appear to know mine even though it appears, clearly stated, on every post.

If someone says, Prove your deity exists then theres really no point in any further discussion, IMO.

If someone asserts "My deity does exist" they can expect to be asked for evidence. However, many topics debated here do not require that exchange.

Okay. Evidence that "Jesus was God" may not be proved (or falsified) without time travel.

Im glad you finally agree.

I have consistently maintained that evidence that Jesus was God has not been presented. "Without time travel" is a pointless addition.

Thus, why should anyone accept claims that the statement is true?

People can accept whatever they want and reject whatever they want. I rule no ones mind.

"People CAN accept is very different from "people should accept" (which is what I asked).

People can accept that fairies control human lives " but there is no verifiable evidence to indicate that anyone should accept that proposition. The same applies to "gods".

An alternative suggestion (which seems more plausible to me) is that Jesus was a wandering preacher who agitated against Roman and Jewish authorities, didn't last long before being executed as a criminal, was "deified" by followers and used as the icon for a splinter-group religion from Judaism.

Okay.

It is good to identify areas of agreement.

Since we evidently do not have answers from the hypothetical deity, that is another non-answer.

You asked how one could know a soul exists. I said one would have to ask the deity " provided s/he/it existed. Thats an answer. You may not like it, but it is still an answer.

Perhaps I should have specified a RATIONAL answer. "Ask fairies" is also an answer " if one is not particular about what they throw out masquerading as an answer.

]I do not consider "I cannot answer without time travel" to be an answer . . .

Youre asking for evidence you know doesnt exist " verifiable, conclusive evidence that deities and the theology around them exists/is true.

Yes. I am aware that verifiable (conclusive?) evidence of deities is not available. However, I ask for the evidence when claims are made.

Then you mock people for not providing what you know doesnt exist.

Correction: I point out to readers that those who make claims of knowledge regarding supernatural entities and events CANNOT substantiate their claims " and allow claimants to mock themselves.

I suppose that this is supposed to demonstrate the virtues of being an atheist.

Notice carefully that my theistic position is clearly stated on every post as: "Non-Theist, tending toward Ignosticism (not Agnosticism)". Thus, I have no motivation to "demonstrate the virtues of being an Atheist".

It is not uncommon for Theists to assume that anyone who opposes their pronouncements is an Atheist. Being ignorant of a debate opponent's theistic position is disadvantageous.

Im not seeing how your mo accomplishes the desired end.

My modus operandi is to challenge claims of knowledge made by promoters of supernaturalism. Readers decide for themselves whether it is effective or not.

Christian lore and dogma maintains that a person's "soul" will (not might) transcend death into an "afterlife". I challenge that claim and ask for evidence beyond "Take my word for it (or his or this book)", or testimonials, conjectures, opinions.

Challenge whatever you will. You asserted that a soul didnt exist.

CORRECTION: I absolutely do / did NOT assert that a soul didn't / doesn't exist. If you think otherwise quote my exact statement with URL.

Kindly refer to "Debate for beginners (and others)" http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... php?t=9533 #17. Read EXACTLY what a person says before trying to rebut or respond. Do not "read into" what they say and do not assume that they mean what you think at first glance. It is particularly important to read carefully anything that touches "tender places" in your psyche or your belief system.

What evidence do you have that a soul doesnt exist? If one makes an assertion s/he must support it with evidence.

If I had made the claim I would be expected to supply the evidence.

I, however, have not asserted that a soul exists.

Then you have nothing to defend in that regard. Right?

Ive only asserted that one might exist.

I agree that "souls" MIGHT exist " and that pink unicorns MIGHT exist on an undiscovered planet " and that gods might exist up in the sky. However, if someone (or some dogma) claims that those unicorns or souls or gods DO exist, I ask for verifiable evidence.

Notice that the OP was not presented with any one person in mind.

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to Zzyzx]

Hello Zzyzx,

In response to my statement, Youre not yet convinced of the deity of Jesus?, You said in your post 353,

Heck no. I haven't encountered any credible, verifiable evidence that Jesus was anything more than a wandering preacher " only stories, testimonials, conjectures, opinions " none of which are convincing to me. People tell tales for many reasons and they are not necessarily true or accurate.

Please explain the necessity for the strong negative answer you gave before reading what I shared to address your request? Have you considered the possibility this may be the crux of the problem? If Jesus is not seen and sought after according to who He really is, the whole topic falls apart and the search continues for the item under your nose.

If you had a paycheck delivered by mail, would you refuse it because of something you may have against the mailman? Although conjectures and opinions are questionable, what's wrong with testimonials of those who are convinced and thus converted? Wouldn't you want the pudding you see another enjoying? The proof is in the pudding, not rhetoric.

Truth has its own merit independent of opinions, conjectures, or the strength of debates. It is settled. Should anyone depend only on the messenger to make his decision for him. If you are victim of the been there-done that problem then so was I. But I kept my determination.

You said,

Keep in mind that Bible quotations are not proof of truth in these debates " and are likely to be meaningless or insignificant to Non-Christians. Those who wish to duel with scriptures are encouraged to use the Holy Huddle or Theology, Doctrine and Dogma sub-forums.

I'm not dueling with scriptures. What do you think of workers engaged in a company meeting with the CEO deliberately left out? Hmmm!

If your question is about whats found in the scriptures, why shouldn't I point to the scriptures for my answer? If you think the Bible is unreal, why shouldn't I affirm that it's the basis of reality? Isn't that what debate is about? What other document is there than the Bible that tells us that we must work, why Israel exists, why we die, etc? Let's please beware of possible denial unless it short-circuits knowledge.

God knows very well that man is so entangled with the complications of this life that he is alienated from the needed settled truth that man tends to be without. Failure to believe it when revealed blinds to supernatural light for ones feet. We must also beware of attempts to debate settled truth unless it lead to doubt to what's already settled. Should children debate the commands of their parents?

Why shouldn't non-Christians listen to former non-Christians? Is medicine meaningless or insignificant to the sick? Although true that Christians have abused the faith, is it wise to judge anything only by its abusers?

To answer my question, Are you guys satisfied now? You said,

Not in the least. You have only quoted unverified tales. Try presenting actual evidence.

Have you considered the possibility that your mistrust of scripture may be the reason that eight years slipped by without fruit to your satisfaction? What's the use for anyone trying to address your issue if you can't believe the source of what's given you? Do you really want the answer or do you wish to later find out that you spent years searching for what's under your nose?

Only a deceiver is happy for a person not to trust the truth of the Bible, the Lordship of Jesus, nor the abundance of magnificent wisdom that it contains.

To answer my question, What more can I say? you ask,

What do you have that doesn't require taking someone's word that supernatural entities and events occurred?

Sorry! I have nothing because there is nothing other than what you stated. Please check out 1 Corinthians 2:14-16. (You see very clearly that I'm still expressing confidence in scripture.) Think about trying to function without someone's word. As a black and white TV is incapable of processing color information, so is the non-spiritual mind incapable of processing spiritual knowledge. Why did Jesus speak in parables?

You said,

Science attempts to understand the real world. Theism attempts to fit observations into whatever dogma / literature it favors.

You are correct that truly scientific effort is an attempt to understand the real world. So does the Biblical church seeks understanding of the real spiritual world without which there's no light for the feet. Is there not also a such thing as scientism, a term that describes those that spread falsehoods in the name of science in their effort to deceive? True science verifies the Bible.

Should all Bible believers be placed in thet same category as those that believe in false gods? Of course not!


To answer my statement, Was the Bible authored by fallible man and God a figment of imagination?

You said,

I have encountered nothing that indicates that the Bible was authored by anything OTHER than fallible men " most of whom are of unknown identity according to Christian scholars and theologians.

Kindly cite any evidence that the Bible was NOT written (authored) by humans or that God was involved.

You are correct that the Bible was manuscript-ed by fallible men. But the men were inspired by God as men that wrote physics and math books were inspired by knowledge of physics and math. Are physics and math books mythical?

The only places where the Bible says that God Himself supernaturally wrote was (1) when He wrote the Decalogue on stone tablets even though Moses broke them upon finding that the people fell into idolatry. Moses rewrote them himself. And (2) the handwriting on the wall that we are familiar with was supernaturally written.

The canonized scriptures we have today were carefully chosen from among many manuscripts of which all did not contain inspired writing. Note Ephesians 4:14-15.

To answer my statement, You want neither to be true. Yes, I mean you! You said,

Are you omniscient, a seer, a mind reader? If not what you say about the thinking of others is speculation. Rather than tell people what THEY think it would be prudent to ask rather than tell " and to seek information before reaching conclusions (though that may be contrary to theistic patterns).

Did I need to be omniscient or a mind reader for common sense judgment based on known facts and things you said? Isn't it possible to judge someones need based on the fact that all are in need of the object in question? Do I need to be a mind reader to be confident that you wouldn't want to walk into a pool of molten lava as long as you have your right mind?

You said,

I do not NEED any "hope" because my life does not consist of "woes" " but is and has been for seventy-five years interesting, fulfilling, successful, pleasant.

Perhaps if I was beset with problems, worries, anxieties I might be susceptible to promises made by those who promote "hope in the afterlife" " that they cannot show to be anything other than imaginary.
That idea may be more appealing to those who are needy or downtrodden.

I am happy to hear that you enjoy a basically fulfilled life. But I'm can only take it from your talk that your concern for the eight years extended search is an anomaly. Everything is otherwise rosy and you need no help or hope? Hmmm!

Shouldn't we beware of over-contentment of this life that it not blind us to much greater hope? Are you all-knowing and omnipotent to speak with surety that there's no afterlife? What's wrong with hope for greater good? I can tell you lots of things wrong with the absence of hope, can't you?

What are you to do with 1 Corinthians 15:17-20? Dont you want a trusted standard for truth without which the words of none of us would mean anything? Is it a man-made myth that you and I will die as the Bible said?

You said,

Bible stories and statements carry absolutely no weight with me (and are not authoritative in these debates according to Forum Rules and Guidelines).

I only know that Biblical truth has weight in all the affairs of man including you and me as long as we are members of the human race.

May I end with the following reminder which I hope would not offend? It is written (as in documented), But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. This is the protocol for believers and for relief from dependence on carnal rhetoric that only keeps in circles.


Take care,
Earl

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 392 by Erexsaur]

Thank you for providing readers with a religionist's perspective

In response to my statement, Youre not yet convinced of the deity of Jesus?, You said in your post 353,

]Heck no. I haven't encountered any credible, verifiable evidence that Jesus was anything more than a wandering preacher " only stories, testimonials, conjectures, opinions " none of which are convincing to me. People tell tales for many reasons and they are not necessarily true or accurate.

Please explain the necessity for the strong negative answer you gave before reading what I shared to address your request?

Before reading? Do you presume to know that?

Have you considered the possibility this may be the crux of the problem? If Jesus is not seen and sought after according to who He really is, the whole topic falls apart and the search continues for the item under your nose.

Okay. Exactly who was Jesus " and exactly how do we know that with assurance of being correct?

If you had a paycheck delivered by mail, would you refuse it because of something you may have against the mailman?

I would object if the mail person was incompetent to deliver mail to the correct address, or constructed a phony paycheck.

Although conjectures and opinions are questionable, what's wrong with testimonials of those who are convinced and thus converted?

Conjectures and opinions have their place with those who choose to accept unverifiable information or base decisions on such "evidence" (or become convinced or converted). I do not.

Wouldn't you want the pudding you see another enjoying? The proof is in the pudding, not rhetoric.

If I want pudding I order and pay for it (or more likely make it myself) regardless what others are doing.

Truth has its own merit independent of opinions, conjectures, or the strength of debates.

How, exactly, is truth of supernatural claims and stories determined?

It is settled. Should anyone depend only on the messenger to make his decision for him. If you are victim of the been there-done that problem then so was I. But I kept my determination.

?

Keep in mind that Bible quotations are not proof of truth in these debates " and are likely to be meaningless or insignificant to Non-Christians. Those who wish to duel with scriptures are encouraged to use the Holy Huddle or Theology, Doctrine and Dogma sub-forums.

I'm not dueling with scriptures. What do you think of workers engaged in a company meeting with the CEO deliberately left out? Hmmm!

I have no assurance that the "workers" who claim to have met with the CEO actually had any such meeting " OR that the claimed CEO is anything more than products of their own imagination.

If your question is about whats found in the scriptures, why shouldn't I point to the scriptures for my answer?

It is legitimate to cite scripture to show what scripture says. However, scriptural quotations are not proof of truth and "no more authoritative than quotations from any other book."

If you think the Bible is unreal, why shouldn't I affirm that it's the basis of reality?

I do not consider the Bible "unreal". It exists as a book. I question / challenge the tales and claims made by writers (whoever they may have been).

Isn't that what debate is about?

An important part of debate is providing evidence that what we say is truthful and accurate.

What other document is there than the Bible that tells us that we must work, why Israel exists, why we die, etc?

Many documents provide reasons for "why we must work". Political documents tell us why Israel exists. Biologists provide information about why we die. No Bible required.

Let's please beware of possible denial unless it short-circuits knowledge.

Let us not be gullible and nave enough to accept tall tales as true.

God knows very well that man is so entangled with the complications of this life that he is alienated from the needed settled truth that man tends to be without. Failure to believe it when revealed blinds to supernatural light for ones feet. We must also beware of attempts to debate settled truth unless it lead to doubt to what's already settled. Should children debate the commands of their parents?

This sounds suspiciously like a sermon.

Why shouldn't non-Christians listen to former non-Christians?

Has someone here suggested that they not listen?

Should Christians listen to Ex-Christians? Notice how many who debate in opposition to religion are Ex-Christians.

Is medicine meaningless or insignificant to the sick? Although true that Christians have abused the faith, is it wise to judge anything only by its abusers?

The medical profession polices its own ranks and outs pretenders. Religions just splinter into tens of thousands of different, often waring, groups and condemn each other for being wrong / false / deceivers.

To answer my question, Are you guys satisfied now? You said,

Not in the least. You have only quoted unverified tales. Try presenting actual evidence.

Have you considered the possibility that your mistrust of scripture may be the reason that eight years slipped by without fruit to your satisfaction?

If the "answer" is to trust scripture, I am not buying. Perhaps you would like to show readers why they should "trust" written by unidentifiable people thousands of years ago claiming to know about invisible, undetectable, supernatural entities and events.

What's the use for anyone trying to address your issue if you can't believe the source of what's given you?

WHY would / should I trust "the source"?

Seventy-five years of life experience has taught me that not everyone nor every source is reliable, truthful and/or accurate. Thus, I ask for verification. I have no desire to be gullible (defined as: a failure of social intelligence in which a person is easily tricked or manipulated into an ill-advised course of action). What others choose in that regard is not my concern.

Do you really want the answer or do you wish to later find out that you spent years searching for what's under your nose?

I want answers that are verifiable. If I can't check their accuracy they are NOT answers to me " but are opinions, testimonials, conjectures.

Only a deceiver is happy for a person not to trust the truth of the Bible, the Lordship of Jesus, nor the abundance of magnificent wisdom that it contains.

Correction: MANY Non-Christians are "happy for a person to not trust the 'truth' of the Bible". Are those who do not trust the Bible "deceivers"?

To answer my question, What more can I say? you ask,

What do you have that doesn't require taking someone's word that supernatural entities and events occurred?

Sorry! I have nothing because there is nothing other than what you stated.

Thank you. That is exactly my point. There is NOTHING other than "take my word for it" to support

Please check out 1 Corinthians 2:14-16.

I am familiar with that passage. To me it can be summarized as "Believe and you will believe"

(You see very clearly that I'm still expressing confidence in scripture.)

Your confidence in scripture is meaningless in debate

Think about trying to function without someone's word.

Many people are astute enough to NOT base important decisions on someone's unverifiable word. If we contemplate buying expensive real estate, for example, unless we are very nave and gullible we do not accept the seller's word " but hire attorneys, title companies, home inspection firms, etc to provide accurate, verifiable information (for which they are legally and financially responsible).

As a black and white TV is incapable of processing color information, so is the non-spiritual mind incapable of processing spiritual knowledge.

A color-capable television set is NOT capable of processing color information unless said information is transmitted. It cannot process imaginary information.

Why did Jesus speak in parables?

Perhaps words attributed to Jesus indicate inability to clearly communicate information. Or, words might have become garbled in transmission. Also, he is said to have indicated to close associates that he did not intend or expect that listeners understand.

Science attempts to understand the real world. Theism attempts to fit observations into whatever dogma / literature it favors.

You are correct that truly scientific effort is an attempt to understand the real world. So does the Biblical church seeks understanding of the real spiritual world without which there's no light for the feet.

Kindly demonstrate that the "spiritual world" is real and not just imaginary.

Is there not also a such thing as scientism, a term that describes those that spread falsehoods in the name of science in their effort to deceive?

Quite often attempts are made to pass off false information as science. Typically such efforts are exposed as frauds by scientists by showing that they do NOT follow the Scientific Method. Creationism / "Intelligent design" is an example.

True science verifies the Bible.

Okay. Let's apply that to the flood tale, animals conversing in human language, long-dead bodies coming back to life. Has "true science" verified any of those " or any of the "miracle" claims?

Should all Bible believers be placed in thet same category as those that believe in false gods? Of course not!

Which "gods" are "false" and which are "real" " AND how, exactly, is that determined?

Was the Bible authored by fallible man and God a figment of imagination?

I have encountered nothing that indicates that the Bible was authored by anything OTHER than fallible men " most of whom are of unknown identity according to Christian scholars and theologians.

Kindly cite any evidence that the Bible was NOT written (authored) by humans or that God was involved.

You are correct that the Bible was manuscript-ed by fallible men.

Thank you

But the men were inspired by God

No thanks " unless it can be demonstrated which, if any, Bible writers were "inspired BY God".

as men that wrote physics and math books were inspired by knowledge of physics and math.

Those who write about physics and math may feel "inspired to write their opinions or conclusions" " without being "inspired" by an outside entity or force.

Are physics and math books mythical?

Some are " particularly those extrapolating beyond what can be verified. Even then, they are based upon observable / measurable / verifiable information.

The only places where the Bible says that God Himself supernaturally wrote was (1) when He wrote the Decalogue on stone tablets even though Moses broke them upon finding that the people fell into idolatry. Moses rewrote them himself. And (2) the handwriting on the wall that we are familiar with was supernaturally written.

So goes the tale.

The canonized scriptures we have today were carefully chosen from among many manuscripts of which all did not contain inspired writing. Note Ephesians 4:14-15.

Church officials from the Roman empire decided (evidently by vote) what earlier writings were to be deemed official church position (or cannon). Did those involved have special ability or knowledge to determine what was "inspired" and what was not? Does popularity of an idea or writing establish its veracity and credibility?

To answer my statement, You want neither to be true. Yes, I mean you! You said,

Are you omniscient, a seer, a mind reader? If not what you say about the thinking of others is speculation. Rather than tell people what THEY think it would be prudent to ask rather than tell " and to seek information before reaching conclusions (though that may be contrary to theistic patterns).

Did I need to be omniscient or a mind reader for common sense judgment based on known facts and things you said?

Have I stated what I want (Quotation, URL)?

Isn't it possible to judge someones need based on the fact that all are in need of the object in question?

Beyond the necessities for life (air, water, food, shelter, etc) and some psychological needs which apply to most people (social contact, mental stimulation, support structure, etc) ALL do NOT have the same thoughts or "needs".

There is NO universal need for "gods". A significant percentage of humans indicate that they are free from that even though it is common in the population at large.

Do I need to be a mind reader to be confident that you wouldn't want to walk into a pool of molten lava as long as you have your right mind?

Remarkable.

I do not NEED any "hope" because my life does not consist of "woes" " but is and has been for seventy-five years interesting, fulfilling, successful, pleasant.

Perhaps if I was beset with problems, worries, anxieties I might be susceptible to promises made by those who promote "hope in the afterlife" " that they cannot show to be anything other than imaginary.
That idea may be more appealing to those who are needy or downtrodden.

I am happy to hear that you enjoy a basically fulfilled life.

Thank you. No gods required.

But I'm can only take it from your talk that your concern for the eight years extended search is an anomaly.

It might be prudent to consider WHY I ask questions of those who promote religion. Could it be that I realize they cannot support their contentions, opinions, tales " and my intent is to help make that apparent to readers / anyone interested?

Everything is otherwise rosy and you need no help or hope? Hmmm!

That is correct. I am more than satisfied with the life I have constructed for myself " and have no need to "hope" for anything more or ask for "help" to achieve anything at all. If physical help or specialized equipment / skills are required for a project, I hire those things which are beyond my personal ability or interest. It has been that way for decades.

Shouldn't we beware of over-contentment of this life that it not blind us to much greater hope?

Charlatans and advertisers prosper by convincing people to aspire toward what they do not have " often creating a "felt need" where none existed. I avoid such people and pitches.

Are you all-knowing and omnipotent to speak with surety that there's no afterlife?

I make NO claim regarding existence or non-existence of a proposed "afterlife" " but ask those who DO claim such knowledge to demonstrate that they speak truth " perhaps they are all-knowing and omnipotent to claim such knowledge.

What's wrong with hope for greater good?

Hope, itself, accomplishes nothing. However, if hope makes a person feel better that is fine for them.

I can tell you lots of things wrong with the absence of hope, can't you?

Hopelessness is evidently destructive of many people. I choose to not participate.

What are you to do with 1 Corinthians 15:17-20?

I do NOTHING with that or any other Bible tales other than point out to Christians that unless long-dead bodies come / came back to life their beliefs are false.

Dont you want a trusted standard for truth without which the words of none of us would mean anything? Is it a man-made myth that you and I will die as the Bible said?

I need no Bible to tell me that I will die. If personal observation of the real world wasn't enough to convince me, I would consult modern biologists and medical personnel " not ancient mystics.

Bible stories and statements carry absolutely no weight with me (and are not authoritative in these debates according to Forum Rules and Guidelines).

I only know that Biblical truth has weight in all the affairs of man including you and me as long as we are members of the human race.

The Bible has had influence whether it is true or not. The same is true of the Koran. So what?

May I end with the following reminder which I hope would not offend? It is written (as in documented), But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. This is the protocol for believers and for relief from dependence on carnal rhetoric that only keeps in circles.

Thanks for the thought. No offense. However, I consider that just another unverifiable claim of supernatural knowledge by some unidentifiable ancient writer.

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to Zzyzx]

Hello Zzyzx,

You replied in your last post,

Okay. Exactly who was Jesus " and exactly how do we know that with assurance of being correct?

My assurance of who Jesus is is based on knowledge from my personal relationship with Him as my knowledge of you is based on my personal relationship with you on this forum.

We already have more than sufficient knowledge of who Jesus is. (I will discuss the validity of scripture further down.) When the rich young ruler ask Jesus what must he do to gain eternal life, he found himself talking to the LORD Himself instead of a fallible man he called good master. That was when Jesus made the sovereign demand to leave all to follow Him (Jesus). Otherwise the ruler wouldnt have walked away in shame because of the human nature bottleneck that kept him from submitting. The Pharisees accused Jesus as a man making himself equal to God because they were too proud and too high to acknowledge Him as Lord despite the miracles.

The pressing issue that therefore stares us in the face is whether or not you or I are willing to acknowledge Jesus as LORD of our lives. Rebellious human nature is the bottleneck that we must all overcome. When almighty self is demoted and Jesus is accepted as Lord, He opens up all truth beyond what we even know to ask. This is part of the born again process. I'm sorry that I sound preachy again but the topic of our discussion is about Him that's preached.

Please stay with it if you been there done that. We must be careful not to allow religious rigamarole to cause us to lose touch with the person (and thus the reality) of Jesus.

Scripture instructs the hearer simply to believe what is proclaimed (Didn't Jesus speak of being as little children?). Please remember, Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise (1 Corinthians 3:18). Although never good to be a fool for fallible man, Jesus makes the fool for Him wise! As written, And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory (1 Timothy 3:16).

You replied,

Conjectures and opinions have their place with those who choose to accept unverifiable information or base decisions on such "evidence" (or become convinced or converted). I do not.

Thank you. As for whether the Bible is verifiable or not, here is a link to a message from the late Dr. D. James Kennedy that covers this issue. Included is a comparison between background knowledge of the Bible with that of other famous written material. Even this detailed message is only a drop in the bucket. You may then determine for yourself the validity of Biblical scripture. Can you imagine the terrible fix we would all be in if the great wisdom in the Bible is found invalid?

Please go to the following website:

https://www.djameskennedy.org/kennedy-classics

Then choose the broadcast, Jesus Christ: Myth or Messiah? (Choices are available for a limited time.)

May I please include these last two preachy lines?

Your continual quest for assurance of the reality of God is only a persistent indication of the need for us all to pray. Such is the believer's job #1. Besides assuring you that He lives by association, He gives answers as no other.

Finally, God has His own time and way of confronting us to show who He really is and how He really cares for us.

Take care,
Earl

[H.sapiens]

[Replying to Zzyzx]

Hello Zzyzx,

You replied in your last post,

Okay. Exactly who was Jesus " and exactly how do we know that with assurance of being correct?

My assurance of who Jesus is is based on knowledge from my personal relationship with Him as my knowledge of you is based on my personal relationship with you on this forum.

We already have more than sufficient knowledge of who Jesus is. (I will discuss the validity of scripture further down.) When the rich young ruler ask Jesus what must he do to gain eternal life, he found himself talking to the LORD Himself instead of a fallible man he called good master. That was when Jesus made the sovereign demand to leave all to follow Him (Jesus). Otherwise the ruler wouldnt have walked away in shame because of the human nature bottleneck that kept him from submitting. The Pharisees accused Jesus as a man making himself equal to God because they were too proud and too high to acknowledge Him as Lord despite the miracles.

The pressing issue that therefore stares us in the face is whether or not you or I are willing to acknowledge Jesus as LORD of our lives. Rebellious human nature is the bottleneck that we must all overcome. When almighty self is demoted and Jesus is accepted as Lord, He opens up all truth beyond what we even know to ask. This is part of the born again process. I'm sorry that I sound preachy again but the topic of our discussion is about Him that's preached.

Please stay with it if you been there done that. We must be careful not to allow religious rigamarole to cause us to lose touch with the person (and thus the reality) of Jesus.

Scripture instructs the hearer simply to believe what is proclaimed (Didn't Jesus speak of being as little children?). Please remember, Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise (1 Corinthians 3:18). Although never good to be a fool for fallible man, Jesus makes the fool for Him wise! As written, And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory (1 Timothy 3:16).

You replied,

Conjectures and opinions have their place with those who choose to accept unverifiable information or base decisions on such "evidence" (or become convinced or converted). I do not.

Thank you. As for whether the Bible is verifiable or not, here is a link to a message from the late Dr. D. James Kennedy that covers this issue. Included is a comparison between background knowledge of the Bible with that of other famous written material. Even this detailed message is only a drop in the bucket. You may then determine for yourself the validity of Biblical scripture. Can you imagine the terrible fix we would all be in if the great wisdom in the Bible is found invalid?

Please go to the following website:

https://www.djameskennedy.org/kennedy-classics

Then choose the broadcast, Jesus Christ: Myth or Messiah? (Choices are available for a limited time.)

May I please include these last two preachy lines?

Your continual quest for assurance of the reality of God is only a persistent indication of the need for us all to pray. Such is the believer's job #1. Besides assuring you that He lives by association, He gives answers as no other.

Finally, God has His own time and way of confronting us to show who He really is and how He really cares for us.

Take care,
Earl

Look back at the OP and answer the questions rather than recommending the horse puckey served up by Kennedy and his ilk.

.
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?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 394 by Erexsaur]

Can you imagine the terrible fix we would all be in if the great wisdom in the Bible is found invalid?

Some 4 to 5 billion people on this planet think that the 'wisdom in the Bible' is in some way invalid (this number counts all those who do not identify as Christian or follow the teachings of Christianity and/or the Bible).
While the world isn't perfect by a long stretch, it is still a fairly decent place to be. I myself on an individual level have come to the conclusion that 99% of the wisdom in the Bible is invalid and am still able to live a decent life.
Your statement has shades of the oft-claimed "I'd be a murderer and/or rapist if it weren't for Jesus!" that I hear.

Scripture instructs the hearer simply to believe what is proclaimed

No. Double no. Triple no. I will not simply believe what I hear being proclaimed. I demand evidence because, wait for it, I do not want to be fooled. I do not want to make any mistakes.
That instruction can be said by anyone for anything. I wouldn't be surprised if that exact line (with the word Scripture swapped for something else) is to be found in the Quran. But neither you nor I 'simply believe' the Quran.
I value my mind. I value rationality and being able to figure things out. What you are advocating for is the death of all that, to place everything into one basket for literally no reason at all other than someone said so.
Countless people throughout history have proclaimed themselves as hearing the divine and, through that, obtained power over others. For their power to be legitimate, I need to be able to hear the divine too. But that doesn't happen, no matter how ward I tried. So I must conclude that such people are speaking falsehoods.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 394 by Erexsaur]

My assurance of who Jesus is is based on knowledge from my personal relationship with Him as my knowledge of you is based on my personal relationship with you on this forum.

Your analogy is faulty. If ever I was asked the question "Did Erexsaur have a relationship with ZZyzx?" I would point to exchanges such as this one, where I or anyone else can see the back and forth conversation you two have.
The same cannot be said for you and Jesus (or for tam and Christ). You say that you have a relationship with Jesus/Christ/Holy Spirit/whatever, but at no point is there any evidence proffered to verify such. I have given a challenge to tam, which I will give to you. A sheet of paper is in my drawer, with one sentence written on it. That sentence is a detail about my life that I have never told anyone. If someone really is communicating with an all knowing spirit, then I am willing to risk this detail becoming public knowledge.

We already have more than sufficient knowledge of who Jesus is.

By 'we', I must assume you are including yourself, Zzyzx, myself, and generally everyone else on the planet into that group. Okay, you mention the Scriptures. Is that it? We don't have any documents that detail Jesus's life before he began preaching (there is the story of him going to the temple and saying to his mother something along the lines of "I am in the house of my father i.e. God" and maybe one more that I'm forgetting).
Are you really suggesting that you are satisfied knowing only about three years of Jesus's life? (and not even three years, just snippets of what the Gospel writers felt were important enough to be written down) Snippets of three years of the life of supposedly the greatest human to have ever lived?

The Pharisees accused Jesus as a man making himself equal to God because they were too proud and too high to acknowledge Him as Lord despite the miracles.

How do you know this event even happened in real history? How do you know what their motivation was? Maybe the miracles weren't miracles and the Pharisees saw through a con-man? Maybe the Pharisees were being loyal to their Jewish teachings?

The pressing issue that therefore stares us in the face is whether or not you or I are willing to acknowledge Jesus as LORD of our lives.

Before I or Z or any other skeptic can consider this, we must be convinced that there even is a magic divine man Jesus. You're skipping over perhaps the most important step of all.

Finally, God has His own time and way of confronting us to show who He really is and how He really cares for us.

According to Z, if there is a God, then that god has wasted 75 years of Z's life hiding. And nearly 30 years of life for me.

[Erexsaur]

Hello Rikuoamero,

You said,

[Replying to post 394 by Erexsaur]

Can you imagine the terrible fix we would all be in if the great wisdom in the Bible is found invalid?

Some 4 to 5 billion people on this planet think that the 'wisdom in the Bible' is in some way invalid (this number counts all those who do not identify as Christian or follow the teachings of Christianity and/or the Bible).
While the world isn't perfect by a long stretch, it is still a fairly decent place to be. I myself on an individual level have come to the conclusion that 99% of the wisdom in the Bible is invalid and am still able to live a decent life.
Your statement has shades of the oft-claimed "I'd be a murderer and/or rapist if it weren't for Jesus!" that I hear.

The majority of the people of the world never heard of the Bible and the Bible with the gospel needs to be brought to them. Much is to be done by the believer that's mandated to take it to them. If the world is fairly decent, why so much sad news, please? Why are there so many in need and in need to be comforted?

How did you read the Bible to arrive at the conclusion that 99% of its wisdom is invalid? You live your decent life according to what standard? By what standard do you judge?

Do you remember what the Bible says about the natural and the spiritual mind? Even though knowledge awaits you, the black and white TV needs to be reborn to be equipped to handle color.

Scripture instructs the hearer simply to believe what is proclaimed

No. Double no. Triple no. I will not simply believe what I hear being proclaimed. I demand evidence because, wait for it, I do not want to be fooled. I do not want to make any mistakes.
That instruction can be said by anyone for anything. I wouldn't be surprised if that exact line (with the word Scripture swapped for something else) is to be found in the Quran. But neither you nor I 'simply believe' the Quran.
I value my mind. I value rationality and being able to figure things out. What you are advocating for is the death of all that, to place everything into one basket for literally no reason at all other than someone said so.
Countless people throughout history have proclaimed themselves as hearing the divine and, through that, obtained power over others. For their power to be legitimate, I need to be able to hear the divine too. But that doesn't happen, no matter how ward I tried. So I must conclude that such people are speaking falsehoods.

I'm sure you are aware of the danger of trying so hard not to be gullible only to unintentionally filter good info along with the bad. I am confident that you have discernment not to allow such a mistake. I say the same to you, H.sapiens about your post #395. The late Dr. Kennedy was among the finest ministers.

I'll will appear again in the next post.

Earl

[Erexsaur]

Hello again, Rikuoamero,

You said,

[Replying to post 394 by Erexsaur]

My assurance of who Jesus is is based on knowledge from my personal relationship with Him as my knowledge of you is based on my personal relationship with you on this forum.

Your analogy is faulty. If ever I was asked the question "Did Erexsaur have a relationship with ZZyzx?" I would point to exchanges such as this one, where I or anyone else can see the back and forth conversation you two have.
The same cannot be said for you and Jesus (or for tam and Christ). You say that you have a relationship with Jesus/Christ/Holy Spirit/whatever, but at no point is there any evidence proffered to verify such. I have given a challenge to tam, which I will give to you. A sheet of paper is in my drawer, with one sentence written on it. That sentence is a detail about my life that I have never told anyone. If someone really is communicating with an all knowing spirit, then I am willing to risk this detail becoming public knowledge.

We already have more than sufficient knowledge of who Jesus is.

By 'we', I must assume you are including yourself, Zzyzx, myself, and generally everyone else on the planet into that group. Okay, you mention the Scriptures. Is that it? We don't have any documents that detail Jesus's life before he began preaching (there is the story of him going to the temple and saying to his mother something along the lines of "I am in the house of my father i.e. God" and maybe one more that I'm forgetting).
Are you really suggesting that you are satisfied knowing only about three years of Jesus's life? (and not even three years, just snippets of what the Gospel writers felt were important enough to be written down) Snippets of three years of the life of supposedly the greatest human to have ever lived?

The Pharisees accused Jesus as a man making himself equal to God because they were too proud and too high to acknowledge Him as Lord despite the miracles.

How do you know this event even happened in real history? How do you know what their motivation was? Maybe the miracles weren't miracles and the Pharisees saw through a con-man? Maybe the Pharisees were being loyal to their Jewish teachings?

The pressing issue that therefore stares us in the face is whether or not you or I are willing to acknowledge Jesus as LORD of our lives.

Before I or Z or any other skeptic can consider this, we must be convinced that there even is a magic divine man Jesus. You're skipping over perhaps the most important step of all.

Finally, God has His own time and way of confronting us to show who He really is and how He really cares for us.

According to Z, if there is a God, then that god has wasted 75 years of Z's life hiding. And nearly 30 years of life for me.

But we know that Jesus died for us and miraculously changed the world for the better even though much is yet to be done by the church. Can you refute a witness for what he witnessed? Where is the evidence? Where is your trust? You will have your proof when you trust Jesus. Nuff said.

I do not direct my posts toward skeptics. I direct them toward people that I trust will hear and that's YOU GUYS!! What do you gain by claiming yourselves skeptics? If you tell a skeptic that a circle is round, he will find a scientific excuse to say that it's square just to disagree with you. You guys AIN'T that kind of person! Are we able to go through life without believing someone that passes new knowledge to us that we are in need of?

God would have wasted your and Z's years if He exists? Are the two of you still breathing? There's your proof that God did not forget you. God never forces His presence on anyone against his will.


Take care,
Earl


Is Zz still home?

[Zzyzx]

.

But we know that Jesus died for us and miraculously changed the world for the better even though much is yet to be done by the church.

WE know no such thing as "Jesus died for us". That is a CLAIM made by some religionists. In debate it has as much merit as any other unsupported claim (including "the cow jumped over the moon").

Can you refute a witness for what he witnessed?

It is NOT necessary to "refute a witness". Instead, it is the witness (or his/her supporters) who has/have the burden of showing that they speak truthfully and accurately.

Do you (generic term) believe everything you are told by those who claim to be witnesses?

Where is the evidence?

Exactly. Where is the evidence that claims by witnesses are true?

Where is your trust?

My trust (concerning matters of importance) is in evidence that can be verified, substantiated, corroborated " preferably by multiple disconnected sources. I trust people to varying degrees, partially dependent upon the level of trust they have EARNED with me.

I am not gullible or nave enough to believe whatever I am told by whoever has a story to tell or a claim to make.

You will have your proof when you trust Jesus. Nuff said.

Notice that many who post here as Non-Theists were Fervent Believers, often for several decades " without finding proof.

I do not direct my posts toward skeptics. I direct them toward people that I trust will hear and that's YOU GUYS!!

As one of "you guys", I am skeptical about any claims of knowledge regarding supernatural entities or events.

Have you presented something that is compelling or convincing? If so, WHAT?

What do you gain by claiming yourselves skeptics?

I make no claim to be a "skeptic" (though others occasionally attempt to attach that label).

If you tell a skeptic that a circle is round, he will find a scientific excuse to say that it's square just to disagree with you.

Skeptic is defined as: 1. a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual. 2. a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others. 3. a person who doubts the truth of a religion, especially Christianity, or of important elements of it.

That does not require arguing about circles.

You guys AIN'T that kind of person!

Some may be " so what?

Are we able to go through life without believing someone that passes new knowledge to us that we are in need of?

A person who has developed ability to use reasoning, judgment, discernment decides what information to accept. Such people realize that not all offers of "new knowledge" (or information) are accurate and truthful.

God would have wasted your and Z's years if He exists? Are the two of you still breathing? There's your proof that God did not forget you.

Is that a claim that God is responsible for people breathing? If so, kindly substantiate that claim (with something more substantial than "Take my word for it (or his or this book)".

God never forces His presence on anyone against his will.

Exactly the same can be said of any imaginary entity.

Is Zz still home?

Evidently. Is that a matter of concern?