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?

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to Zzyzx]

Hello Zzyzx,

Here is your original post:

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)

Before addressing your request that I defend the Judo-Christian faith, may I please very briefly cover the foundation on which the Biblical gospel rests? Even though I understand that I should not overly depend on Bible scripture as an unnecessarily crutch, I cannot lay it aside because it is the indispensable foundation for knowledge thats only to be used wisely. You would not want the foundation removed from your house.

The Bible book of Genesis is the starting point of the Judo-Christian worldview. It starts with, In the beginning God. . . If you start a company, YOUR word would be the weightiest of all. God by the weight of His word brought the universe including you and me into existence. As creation progressed, we find phrases like, and God saw that it was good.

Why do we have seven day weeks including the sabbath? Why do we wear clothes, marry, or even die? What other worldview explains the origin of the woman? From where were the phrases, created equal and with unalienable rights in the US Constitution derived? These things and much more are documented in the foundational book of Genesis.

Bullet point: Although made in the image of God, innocent, and given freedom of choice, Adam and Eve took the wrong choice to violate Gods weighty command not to eat the deadly fruit and brought upon themselves the fall that affected the universe. Death and destruction BEGAN to reign from that day until now as consequences for the disobedience. But along with the curse came a PROMISE that death would be defeated. All of mankind have thus inherited Adams sin to be imprisoned and sentenced to death by the sinful nature. Does a child need to be taught to do wrong?

The atheistic evolutionary worldview on the other hand neither conveys knowledge of man as made in the likeness of God nor the fact that a fall even took place nor knowledge of the ever present influence of a deceiving spirit. The survival of the fittest mentality implicates that all of life to this day is the product of millions of years of death and destruction, thus making God to appear as a careless, reckless creator to those that try to wedge God into this worldview. Whats the need to divide the world with a diametrically opposite apparent view of reality?

The answers I am about to give would be totally meaningless without the vital foundation I shared and emphasized above. How does one know where he is going unless he knows where he has been?

You said,

Jesus was anything more than human? None

Think of a case where an innocent person voluntarily takes the punishment for a guilty person to unconditionally set the guilty free. That would not be possible if the substitute was also guilty. Neither would salvation of man be possible if Jesus was only an ordinary man instead of both God and man. The virgin birth is the thing that set Him apart. He is God born in the same sin-corrupted body as ours. Fathered by God, he escaped the inheritance of Adams sin and is thus sinless. Without sin, not worthy of death, He died the death we deserved to set us free from the death sentence that we deserve. Jesus is thus our second Adam to pass a righteous heritage to us instead of a sin heritage. This is where the Genesis promise is fulfilled (Genesis 3:15). But substitutionary punishment is a colossal waste for the person that never forsakes his wrongful tendencies to force upon himself the punishment he deserves regardless. Hence the call for all to the about face of repentance.

Also please note the phrase, I am in John 8:58 and Ex 3:14.

The belief that evolution is fact offers no foundation for knowledge for any need for salvation for man and thus no need for Jesus who would be nonexistent because God is seen as nonexistent. Man is thus considered as already basically good but has no final destiny because you and I are already there. With no perceived hope beyond this life, one may only expect to die like a rat or a cockroach. Tell this to the extremely poor. No wonder the vital plan of salvation dangerously appears only as worthless conjecture to so many! Is this not a reason many commit suicide? But Jesus offered hope and fulfillment for this life and life beyond for all.

Humans possess a soul? None

What concern has a dog for his masters cheating on his (the masters) wife? Unlike animals, we humans have much concern for things beyond mere survival. Why do we live to much higher standards than animals? Why is it wrong to finish off a disabled man while not considered wrong to shoot a disabled horse? From where have we conviction? Why do we have conscience that may be obeyed or seared?

One thing that helps me to know that I have a soul is memory of a subtle innate fear and emptiness that was silenced and replaced with innate hope and sense of fulfillment by my conversion from the new birth. Is my testimony worthless in debate? Then why are testimonies useful in court? Last but not least, if I didnt see you and me as having souls, you wouldnt have seen very much of me on these forums to pester you guys if any at all.

An afterlife exists? None

The best evidence of a coming afterlife is the changed life of born-again believers coupled with the preaching of it. I say again that testimonies are useful in court. The believer gains eternal life at the moment of his conversion. As written, Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Please note the phrase, of the Spirit where the believer becomes aware of the spiritual life. The believers transformation during his conversion is the equivalent of a black and white TV transformed to a color TV. The world opens up to him in natural and spiritual color that he never saw prior to the conversion. Vision and understanding deepens. Conversion comes after repentance.

But the atheistic evolutionary mindset points to no need for such. Whats the need for an afterlife if theres no supernatural as evolutionists would have us to believe? From where would the need even arise if we are only products of chance? We are valuable and have dignity to be preserved!

Miracles described in Bible tales actually occurred? None

But they occur. Listen to missionaries that have been to Africa where the gospel was delivered to people with zero prior knowledge of Jesus or even the Bible. Miracles occur in well equipped modern hospitals where doctors exhausted all of their capabilities toward the patient. Here is a topic where its advantageous to stay in the company of believers instead of deniers.

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

Even though positive evidences of the past flood event are found widespread in geology, it is tied up in controversy. But flood legends are found in cultures around the world. The wall of Jericho that fell was found by archaeologists. But all supernatural miracles cannot be naturally explained. An example is the water made wine. But with no foundational belief in the existence of God, neither would there be belief that any Biblical miracle would be possible. All things are possible with God.

God intercedes in human affairs or life events? None

Ask George Washington or General Patton or Dr. King. How big a book do I need to list names of people to ask? Ask me. I know of no reason why I shouldnt even ask you. People that messed with the Jews learned the hard way that God is involved in the affairs of man. How do you explain the phrase, what goes around comes around?. I would never want to be a power line worker for fear of doing something stupid and getting zapped. But God gives people hearts to do the jobs to fill the needed slots, even those that others wouldnt do.

Bible writers were actually inspired by God? None

The tree is known by its fruit. Even if we should throw out Moses and God, to whom shall we credit the commandments, Thou shalt not kill, do not covet, etc? Where else would we find the NT commandment, love your enemies? What is the right to ownership based on? What about the first and great commandment to love God with all of heart and the second commandment to love neighbor? The greater my love for God, the greater my respect for you guys. Why do we marry and wear clothes? As daily working of math prove whats taught from math books, so does daily life prove whats written in the Bible. Why is there death?

Bible history contains more helpful hints. What made ancient Jewish manuscripts so special that they were re-copied with extreme care for preservation against time degradation? Why does the Bible contains only 66 books (plus 14 in the apocrypha) carefully chosen out of many? Whats so special about it that its the worlds best seller?


One way to keep people in bondage to a usurper of power is to keep them away from empowering knowledge. Removal of the central character of Creation destroys knowledge.

I hope that what I shared above addressed your need.

May I please suggest the following DVD thats also available as a download? Its called, Why Biblical Creation Is Good Science Featuring Prof. Stuart Burgess found here:

https://answersingenesis.org/store/prod ... u=30-9-492

The speaker is a scientist that designed a vital part of a $2 billion European satellite that presented the case very well!

Take care,
Earl

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 560 by Erexsaur]

Think of a case where an innocent person voluntarily takes the punishment for a guilty person to unconditionally set the guilty free.

Has such a thing (other than Jesus) ever happened? Would court systems in this day and age allow it? If they wouldn't allow it, what's their reason for not allowing it?

Even though I understand that I should not overly depend on Bible scripture as an unnecessarily crutch, I cannot lay it aside because it is the indispensable foundation for knowledge thats only to be used wisely.

If this were true, then societies/civilisations that pre-dated the Bible or never knew about it simply could not have known anything.
And yet they did. Somehow. Somehow the Incas were able to establish a widespread empire and accomplish quite a few things, despite not having the Bible at all.
So explain to me how a group of humans are able to know things, accomplish things, despite not having what you claim to be the 'indispensable foundation for knowledge'?

The belief that evolution is fact offers no foundation for knowledge for any need for salvation for man and thus no need for Jesus who would be nonexistent because God is seen as nonexistent.

Correct, because such a thing is beyond evolution's scope. It would be like dissing trigonometry for not talking about the rate of growth of fungi.
And no, Jesus wouldn't be non-existent. Just not what his followers claim him to be.

With no perceived hope beyond this life, one may only expect to die like a rat or a cockroach.

Expect to die like a cockroach? You mean...being stepped on? No, I expect to die in bed, surrounded by crying relatives.

h. Tell this to the extremely poor.

Speaking (well relatively poor, compared to most people, although I was worse off when I was younger).

Is this not a reason many commit suicide?

Many who have believed what you believe committed suicide.

But Jesus offered hope and fulfillment for this life and life beyond for all.

Offerings only mean something if they are actually true.

Is my testimony worthless in debate?

When you're speaking to things that are not common experience, then yes. We need more than just your testimony before we can establish "Yup, you have a soul".

Then why are testimonies useful in court?

Because they speak about things that are relatively common. "I saw the defendant pull the trigger". Well, it's not impossible for someone to hold a gun, to aim it at someone, to pull a trigger.
"I saw the guy rise from the dead" would not be accepted in court however, because it is not considered possible for such a thing to happen in actuality.

Last but not least, if I didnt see you and me as having souls, you wouldnt have seen very much of me on these forums to pester you guys if any at all.

Your point being? That only people who believe we have souls are on this site frequently? What about myself then? I don't believe we have souls and I'm here every day.

The best evidence of a coming afterlife is the changed life of born-again believers coupled with the preaching of it.

If that's the best you can offer, no wonder I don't believe in it. Changes in personality and preaching are NOT evidence of an afterlife.

I say again that testimonies are useful in court.

As explained before, not always. You're implying that testimonies are ALWAYS accepted, which they are not.

The believer gains eternal life at the moment of his conversion. As written, Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Evidence please. I need more than the supposed words of a wandering preacher from 2,000 years ago that
1) the after-life is an actual thing
2) this is how one would enter it

The believers transformation during his conversion is the equivalent of a black and white TV transformed to a color TV.

Then you're saying this is a thing that doesn't happen, since one cannot change a B/W TV to colour (except by replacement of internal electronics, which is a thing that can be observed and measured).

But with no foundational belief in the existence of God, neither would there be belief that any Biblical miracle would be possible. All things are possible with God.

In other words, we need to believe in the one absurd thing in order to believe in these other absurd things.

May I please suggest the following DVD thats also available as a download? Its called, Why Biblical Creation Is Good Science Featuring Prof. Stuart Burgess found here:

And after trumpeting science in this post (not really) you then link AiG, who quite proudly admit to having a confirmation bias and to manipulating and discarding evidence that contradicts what they believe.
Wow, no wonder I don't believe anything you say Erexsaur. Your credibility with myself is rock bottom.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 560 by Erexsaur]


Hi Earl,

Your lengthy and considered reply has caused me to temporarily set aside my semi-retirement from extensive debate in threads.

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)

Before addressing your request that I defend the Judo-Christian faith, may I please very briefly cover the foundation on which the Biblical gospel rests? Even though I understand that I should not overly depend on Bible scripture as an unnecessarily crutch, I cannot lay it aside because it is the indispensable foundation for knowledge thats only to be used wisely. You would not want the foundation removed from your house.

Knowledge existed long before the Bible characters and in many societies worldwide.

I did not ask for a defense of the faith but for truthful and non evasive answers to fundamental questions. I still have not encountered any such thing.

The Bible book of Genesis is the starting point of the Judo-Christian worldview. It starts with, In the beginning God. . . If you start a company, YOUR word would be the weightiest of all. God by the weight of His word brought the universe including you and me into existence. As creation progressed, we find phrases like, and God saw that it was good.

That is an example of starting with a conclusion (belief) and attempting to justify what one already believes. If we are interested in finding truth we start with information BEFORE reaching a conclusion.

Why do we have seven day weeks including the sabbath?

Convention.

There is no week (or month) in the real world of nature. Those are artificial constructs made up by humans. A day, however, refers to one rotation and a year one revolution. Neither of those have a starting or ending point.

Sabbath is a religious concept.

BTW, days and months are named for pagan characters.

Why do we wear clothes, marry, or even die?

We wear clothes for comfort (including modesty) and for protection from environmental conditions or hazards. Pair bonding is common in many animal social systems (including humans). Marriage is simply a formalization of that relationship. All living things die (to the best of our knowledge) and biologists can explain the processes involved.

What other worldview explains the origin of the woman?

Biology explains the origin of the woman FAR more rationally than the biblical rib tale.

From where were the phrases, created equal and with unalienable rights in the US Constitution derived? These things and much more are documented in the foundational book of Genesis.

Did those phrases originate with the Bible?

Bullet point: Although made in the image of God, innocent, and given freedom of choice, Adam and Eve took the wrong choice to violate Gods weighty command not to eat the deadly fruit and brought upon themselves the fall that affected the universe. Death and destruction BEGAN to reign from that day until now as consequences for the disobedience.

So goes the tale.

But along with the curse came a PROMISE that death would be defeated. All of mankind have thus inherited Adams sin to be imprisoned and sentenced to death by the sinful nature.

More unsubstantiated tales.

Does a child need to be taught to do wrong?

Children do things " some of which are considered wrong in their society, some of which are considered right. They are taught which is which.

The atheistic evolutionary worldview

No such thing " see below

on the other hand neither conveys knowledge of man as made in the likeness of God nor the fact that a fall even took place nor knowledge of the ever present influence of a deceiving spirit.

Atheism does not accept god tales " thus god is meaningless (though aware that others have god beliefs).

The survival of the fittest mentality implicates that all of life to this day is the product of millions of years of death and destruction,

Correction: survival of the fittest means that organisms that are best able to survive and reproduce succeed in doing so more frequently than organisms that are less able to survive and reproduce. Period.

thus making God to appear as a careless, reckless creator to those that try to wedge God into this worldview. Whats the need to divide the world with a diametrically opposite apparent view of reality?

There are no gods in Atheism.

The answers I am about to give would be totally meaningless without the vital foundation I shared and emphasized above.

Foundation NOT accepted

How does one know where he is going unless he knows where he has been?

No gods are required for people to know where they have been.

Jesus was anything more than human? None

Think of a case where an innocent person voluntarily takes the punishment for a guilty person to unconditionally set the guilty free. That would not be possible if the substitute was also guilty.

Yes, there are tales to the effect of institutional atonement. It is not assumed in these debates that the tales are true.

I am unaware of any systems of justice (or reasoning) that allow a person to take punishment for another.

Where is assurance that Jesus was anything more than human? Guesswork?

Neither would salvation of man be possible if Jesus was only an ordinary man instead of both God and man.

The salvation of man is a religious concept that has not been shown to be anything more than imaginary.

The virgin birth is the thing that set Him apart.

Is this claim / tale true? How can that be verified?

He is God born in the same sin-corrupted body as ours. Fathered by God, he escaped the inheritance of Adams sin and is thus sinless. Without sin, not worthy of death, He died the death we deserved to set us free from the death sentence that we deserve. Jesus is thus our second Adam to pass a righteous heritage to us instead of a sin heritage.

Again, these are religious tales that are NOT assumed to be true in these debates. Can you furnish verifiable information to indicate that they are true and accurate?

This is where the Genesis promise is fulfilled (Genesis 3:15). But substitutionary punishment is a colossal waste for the person that never forsakes his wrongful tendencies to force upon himself the punishment he deserves regardless. Hence the call for all to the about face of repentance.

Religious dogma is not assurance of truth or accuracy.

Also please note the phrase, I am in John 8:58 and Ex 3:14.

Opinion (of whoever wrote John and Exodus) noted

The belief that evolution is fact offers no foundation for knowledge for any need for salvation for man and thus no need for Jesus who would be nonexistent because God is seen as nonexistent.

Evolution (genetic change through generations) occurs each time a microbe becomes antibiotic resistant. What has that to do with Jesus, God, or salvation?

Man is thus considered as already basically good but has no final destiny because you and I are already there.

Some consider man basically good others do not " regardless of religious belief. So what?

With no perceived hope beyond this life, one may only expect to die like a rat or a cockroach.

To the best of our knowledge all living things die (including religious people). So what?

There is no assurance that the perceived hope is anything more than imagination.

Tell this to the extremely poor. No wonder the vital plan of salvation dangerously appears only as worthless conjecture to so many! Is this not a reason many commit suicide? But Jesus offered hope and fulfillment for this life and life beyond for all.

Religion often appeals to the poor, downtrodden, hopeless, aimless, etc with unverified promises of better things after you die.

Many who commit suicide are Christians who presumably have heard the promises. Likewise, many who have abortions, are imprisoned, get divorces are Christians.

Humans possess a soul? None

What concern has a dog for his masters cheating on his (the masters) wife? Unlike animals, we humans have much concern for things beyond mere survival. Why do we live to much higher standards than animals? Why is it wrong to finish off a disabled man while not considered wrong to shoot a disabled horse? From where have we conviction? Why do we have conscience that may be obeyed or seared?

Is this seriously offered as evidence that humans possess a soul? Surely you jest.

We live in societies that establish mores, ethics, morals, laws, customs " irrespective of religion. Religious people and societies are not immune from atrocities.

US law is supposed to be religion-neutral but has been somewhat corrupted in that regard.

One thing that helps me to know that I have a soul is memory of a subtle innate fear and emptiness that was silenced and replaced with innate hope and sense of fulfillment by my conversion from the new birth. Is my testimony worthless in debate?

Yes, your testimony is worthless in debate " just as is my testimony that I rejected the empty threats and promises of Christianity as a child.

Then why are testimonies useful in court?

Witness testimony in court must meet stringent requirements " including that the witness be subject to cross-examination to demonstrate their credibility or lack of credibility. I think is not generally admissible " nor is hearsay.

Last but not least, if I didnt see you and me as having souls, you wouldnt have seen very much of me on these forums to pester you guys if any at all.

As I said, no evidence " just opinions and testimonials.

An afterlife exists? None

The best evidence of a coming afterlife is the changed life of born-again believers coupled with the preaching of it.

Emotional appeals and testimonials.

I say again that testimonies are useful in court.

Would a court testimonial that an afterlife exists be useful in court / accepted as evidence?

The believer gains eternal life at the moment of his conversion.

Opinions about this seem to vary within Christendom.

As written, Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Opinion noted.

Please note the phrase, of the Spirit where the believer becomes aware of the spiritual life. The believers transformation during his conversion is the equivalent of a black and white TV transformed to a color TV. The world opens up to him in natural and spiritual color that he never saw prior to the conversion. Vision and understanding deepens. Conversion comes after repentance.

Would that hold up in court? It does NOT hold up in debate.

Those who wish to discuss their beliefs as though true are welcome to use TD&D, HH, or other sub-forums that are set aside for believers to talk to one another. Here in C&A the Guidelines clearly specify that no religious beliefs or literature are authoritative or proof of truth.

But the atheistic evolutionary mindset points to no need for such.

What, exactly, is the atheistic evolutionary mindset to which you refer?

Atheism (without belief in gods)
Evolution (genetic change through generations)

Are separate issues. Some who are Atheists accept that evolution occurs " some do not. Some who accept evolution are Atheists " some are not (many Christians accept that evolution occurs).

Whats the need for an afterlife if theres no supernatural as evolutionists would have us to believe?

There is no need for an afterlife except in the minds of those who believe religious tales.

From where would the need even arise if we are only products of chance?

Many seem irate when it is suggested that they (we) and all animals are products of nature rather than creations of a favorite god as told by ancient storytellers.

We are valuable and have dignity to be preserved!

Those without religious / supernatural beliefs are no less valuable and have no less dignity that religionists. However, religionists often seem to regard themselves as superior (while denying doing so).

Miracles described in Bible tales actually occurred? None

But they occur.

Kindly document miracles that have occurred and can be verified as 1) actually occurred, 2) due to supernatural influence.

Listen to missionaries that have been to Africa where the gospel was delivered to people with zero prior knowledge of Jesus or even the Bible. Miracles occur in well equipped modern hospitals where doctors exhausted all of their capabilities toward the patient. Here is a topic where its advantageous to stay in the company of believers instead of deniers.

If miracle is defined as an uncommon occurrence, such things do occur. If miracle is defined as an event of unknown or not-understood origin, such things do occur.

However, if miracle is defined as supernatural influence, any such claims bear the burden of demonstrating the supernatural involvement.

If miracle is defined as You can't explain it so Godddit, that is invalid.

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

Even though positive evidences of the past flood event are found widespread in geology, it is tied up in controversy. But flood legends are found in cultures around the world.

Floods are natural events associated with lowlands, coastal areas, river valleys " NOT to the tops of mountains as per the Genesis account " a worldwide flood that wiped out all humans and other animals other than those on the ark.

The wall of Jericho that fell was found by archaeologists.

Walls fall . . . no gods required.

But all supernatural miracles cannot be naturally explained.

Kindly identify a supernatural miracle that actually occurred " not just TALES and testimonials about such things.

An example is the water made wine.

There is a story about that happening. Is the story true?

Illusionists can do the water-into-wine trick. No gods required " unless they too are supernatural.

But with no foundational belief in the existence of God, neither would there be belief that any Biblical miracle would be possible.

Exactly. There MUST be a preconception (existing belief) in God before miracles are accepted as truthful and accurate.

If miracles ACTUALLY occurred, no belief would be necessary.

All things are possible with God.

Preaching

God intercedes in human affairs or life events? None

Ask George Washington or General Patton or Dr. King. How big a book do I need to list names of people to ask? Ask me.

Take my word for it (or his or this book) is meaningless to me.

Appeals to authority are likewise meaningless " as are personal testimonials (not only to me but also in debate).

I know of no reason why I shouldnt even ask you.

Ask away.

People that messed with the Jews learned the hard way that God is involved in the affairs of man.

OH? Does God protect the Jews and punish their enemies?

How do you explain the phrase, what goes around comes around?.

I do not make nor explain that phrase.

I would never want to be a power line worker for fear of doing something stupid and getting zapped. But God gives people hearts to do the jobs to fill the needed slots, even those that others wouldnt do.

Humans have a wide range of abilities. What assures that any of them came from God? That is just a claim made by one of the world's 4000 religions worshiping 2000+ gods.

Bible writers were actually inspired by God? None

The tree is known by its fruit.

Not all trees produce fruit. Botanists know trees by their physical characteristics (bark, leaves, branching pattern, overall size and shape, etc).

Even if we should throw out Moses and God, to whom shall we credit the commandments, Thou shalt not kill, do not covet, etc?

Societies that do not worship Moses or God have rules against killing, stealing, etc. No gods required.

Where else would we find the NT commandment, love your enemies?

Perhaps nowhere else " because it is poor advice, impractical, idealistic, counter-productive.

What is the right to ownership based on?

Civil law

What about the first and great commandment to love God with all of heart

That suggests an egocentric, insecure attitude foisted onto a supposedly infinite intelligence by priests pretending to know such things.

and the second commandment to love neighbor?

The rest of that commandment is as thyself " which renders it hopelessly idealistic, pie in the sky.

The greater my love for God, the greater my respect for you guys.

I, for one, prefer to earn any respect rather than have it granted as a spin off from god worship.

I specifically decline inclusion in you guys. My position and ideas are my responsibility and are not those of any group.

Why do we marry and wear clothes?

People tend to wear clothes for comfort and protection from weather elements and environmental hazards (and have evidently been doing so for thousands of years). Pair bonding (sometimes considered marriage) is common among human and non-human social groups.

Are gods required for people to marry or wear clothing?

As daily working of math prove whats taught from math books, so does daily life prove whats written in the Bible.

Does life without the Bible prove that the Bible is unnecessary?

Math can be checked for accuracy. Can Bible tales be verified as being truthful and accurate?

Why is there death?

As best we know all living things die. Biologists explain the processes that lead to death of various organisms, including humans.

I do not debate the philosophical meaning of death " but leave that to those who pretend to know.

Bible history contains more helpful hints.

Bible history indicates that the document was compiled from the writings of many people whose identity is unknown, disputed, debated.

What helpful hints from the Bible apply to life in modern times " hints that are not widely available from other sources, ideologies, philosophies, etc?

What made ancient Jewish manuscripts so special that they were re-copied with extreme care for preservation against time degradation?

Christian scholars and theologians recognize that parts of the Bible / Jewish manuscripts have been modified in the copying processes " changes, additions, deletions.

Why does the Bible contains only 66 books (plus 14 in the apocrypha) carefully chosen out of many?

Perhaps some are unaware that the Catholic Bible contains 73 books. Those are the people who produced the Bible and kept it for a thousand years before Protestantism splintered off and further splintered into tens of thousands of sects.

The number of books in the Bible was determined by committees of church officials meeting under the direction of Roman emperors. Evidently they voted for inclusion / exclusion.

Whats so special about it that its the worlds best seller?

An actual list of the world's best selling books:

1. A Tale of Two Cities, by Charles Dickens 200 million copies sold since 1859
2. The Lord of the Rings, by J. R. R. Tolkien 150 million copies sold since 1954
3. The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry 140 million copies sold since 1943
4. And Then There Were None, by Agatha Christie 100 million copies sold since 1939
5. Dream of the Red Chamber, by Cao Xueqin 100 million copies sold since 1791
6. The Hobbit, by J. R. R. Tolkien 100 million copies sold since 1937
7. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, by C. S. Lewis 85 million copies sold since 1950
8. She: A History of Adventure, by H. Rider Haggard 83 million copies since 1887
9. The Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown 80 million copies sold since 2003
10. Think and Grow Rich, by Napoleon Hill 70 million copies sold since 1937

Kindly supply SALES figures for the Bible.

One way to keep people in bondage to a usurper of power is to keep them away from empowering knowledge.

Agreed. Religious leaders (and others) make good use of this truism.

Removal of the central character of Creation destroys knowledge.

The central character of creation hasn't been shown to be anything more than imagination or opinion.

Knowledge is independent of and often in conflict with tales about one characters imputed by one of the thousands of religions.

I hope that what I shared above addressed your need.

Need?

May I please suggest the following DVD thats also available as a download? Its called, Why Biblical Creation Is Good Science Featuring Prof. Stuart Burgess found here:

I do not watch video commercials (or videos in general) and do not seek verifiable information from Answers in Genesis.

If you wish to present arguments based on Burgess, feel free to actually debate the ideas.

The speaker is a scientist that designed a vital part of a $2 billion European satellite that presented the case very well!

There are millions of scientists worldwide (some of whom work on expensive projects). It is not surprising that some of them promote nearly any idea imaginable.

[Justin108]

Think of a case where an innocent person voluntarily takes the punishment for a guilty person to unconditionally set the guilty free. That would not be possible if the substitute was also guilty.

What kind of messed up justice system would allow an innocent person to be punished on behalf of a guilty person?

Neither would salvation of man be possible if Jesus was only an ordinary man instead of both God and man.

The OP asks for verifiable evidence that Jesus was anything more than a man. Your response is that Jesus supposedly saved us from our sins. This is not "verifiable proof". How do you know Jesus saved us from our sins?

The virgin birth is the thing that set Him apart.

How do you know Mary was a virgin during Jesus' birth?

inheritance of Adams sin and is thus sinless. Without sin, not worthy of death, He died the death we deserved to set us free from the death sentence that we deserve. Jesus is thus our second Adam to pass a righteous heritage to us instead of a sin heritage. This is where the Genesis promise is fulfilled (Genesis 3:15). But substitutionary punishment is a colossal waste for the person that never forsakes his wrongful tendencies to force upon himself the punishment he deserves regardless. Hence the call for all to the about face of repentance.

Also please note the phrase, I am in John 8:58 and Ex 3:14.

The belief that evolution is fact offers no foundation for knowledge for any need for salvation for man and thus no need for Jesus who would be nonexistent because God is seen as nonexistent. Man is thus considered as already basically good but has no final destiny because you and I are already there. With no perceived hope beyond this life, one may only expect to die like a rat or a cockroach. Tell this to the extremely poor. No wonder the vital plan of salvation dangerously appears only as worthless conjecture to so many! Is this not a reason many commit suicide? But Jesus offered hope and fulfillment for this life and life beyond for all.

This whole paragraph is nothing but preaching... and after reading the rest I see your entire post is nothing but preaching

[For_The_Kingdom]

Nice dodge.

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

You can't read anything in antiquity and not run across someone that is "claiming" something...and I am sure you don't apply the whole "beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation" bit to anything else in antiquity, but you sure as heck will staple such a notion to the Bible.

Now how is that for a double standard?

WHAT historical evidence for the resurrection? There are STORIES in a book.

And those "stories" in the book could be true, couldn't they? The question is, are they? Well..

Kindly present evidence that the stories are true and accurate.

Too easy.

Another nice dodge.

Kindly present evidence that soul and afterlife are anything more than imaginary.

If the argument from consciousness is true (which is what I appealed to), then humans are more than just piles of matter. There is something "else" there.

Since Jesus has NOT been shown to be anything more than a wandering Jewish preacher, and the resurrection has not been shown to have literally / really / actually occurred in the real world, that is NOT verification that the miracles were more likely than not.

Then please explain the origins of the disciples belief in the Resurrection, sir.

Kindly differentiate between unverified stories and verifiable evidence.

Easy.

Unusual events occur frequently. Some claim supernatural involvement BUT cannot demonstrate that claim is anything more than personal opinion / imagination / conjecture.

The origins of sentient life can be said to be a miracle.

Allegedly is the key word. Churchmen claim divine inspiration but cannot show that is true.

What if we have background information that the "claims" are more likely than not to reflect truth value?

Did gospel writers claim to be divinely inspired? If (since) not, who is / was in a position to know if they were or not?

At worse, we can conclude that they "believed" that they were inspired...just like they "believed" in the Resurrection.

One can say, however, that gospel writers were inspired (motivated) to write their opinions about God.

I think "opinions" is a shallow word to use. Can you read the Gospels or any of the Epistles and really conclude that they were writing a bunch of "opinions"?

WHAT evidence? A book of stories that cannot be shown to be true? Take my word for it (or his or this book? Emotional appeals? Threats and promises for after you die?

Read the Gospels with an open mind and get to know Jesus...watch the debates on the Resurrection. Have faith.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 564 by For_The_Kingdom]


Although I am winding down my participation in threads, I cannot resist replying to this one.

Nice dodge.

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

You can't read anything in antiquity and not run across someone that is "claiming" something...

Agreed

and I am sure you don't apply the whole "beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials
and speculation" bit to anything else in antiquity, but you sure as heck will staple such a notion to the Bible.

Disagreed. I apply the same level of scrutiny and demand for verifiable evidence to ANY claim of importance that I am asked to accept as truthful and accurate (historical, theological, scientific, everyday world).

Now how is that for a double standard?

My standards for acceptance are consistent. A double standard applies when one accepts and makes decisions without verifiable evidence regarding religious tales but is more demanding of evidence when making decisions on financial matters.

WHAT historical evidence for the resurrection? There are STORIES in a book.

And those "stories" in the book could be true, couldn't they?

Yes, they could be true, could be false, could contain much truth, could contain little truth.

The question is, are they? Well..

That IS the question. Care to take a stab at answering?

Kindly present evidence that the stories are true and accurate.

Too easy.

Feel free to begin whenever you are ready. Readers will likely look forward to the evidence you have to present (as would Christian scholars and theologians).

Another nice dodge.

Kindly present evidence that soul and afterlife are anything more than imaginary.

If the argument from consciousness is true (which is what I appealed to),

An argument is NOT evidence " it is opinion.

then humans are more than just piles of matter.

Has someone here claimed that humans are just piles of matter? If not that is a stinky fish (red herring) remark.

There is something "else" there.

Continue . . .

Since Jesus has NOT been shown to be anything more than a wandering Jewish preacher, and the resurrection has not been shown to have literally / really / actually occurred in the real world, that is NOT verification that the miracles were more likely than not.

Then please explain the origins of the disciples belief in the Resurrection, sir.

I do not pretend to know the beliefs or motivations of anyone " let alone people who lived thousands of years ago, in a very different culture, with very different circumstances. Do you pretend to know (or actually think you do know beyond speculation and opinion)?

Kindly differentiate between unverified stories and verifiable evidence.

Easy.

Again, feel free to begin whenever you are ready

Unusual events occur frequently. Some claim supernatural involvement BUT cannot demonstrate that claim is anything more than personal opinion / imagination / conjecture.

The origins of sentient life can be said to be a miracle.

Said to be is meaningless.

Kindly show verifiable evidence that supernaturalism was involved " something more than speculation, ancient tales, testimonials

Allegedly is the key word. Churchmen claim divine inspiration but cannot show that is true.

What if we have background information that the "claims" are more likely than not to reflect truth value?

Present the information for all to evaluate.

More likely than not is pure speculation / opinion / guesswork.

Did gospel writers claim to be divinely inspired? If (since) not, who is / was in a position to know if they were or not?

At worse, we can conclude that they "believed" that they were inspired...just like they "believed" in the Resurrection.

One can speculate about beliefs and motivations of ancient people " and pretend to know.

Perhaps some were motivated (felt inspired) to record stories they heard from others " since gospel writers cannot be identified with certainty, let alone be shown to have personally witnessed the events and conversations they write about.

One can say, however, that gospel writers were inspired (motivated) to write their opinions about God.

I think "opinions" is a shallow word to use.

Opinion noted

Can you read the Gospels or any of the Epistles and really conclude that they were writing a bunch of "opinions"?

Certainly. I did not drink the Kool Aid of religious indoctrination so I feel no compulsion to defend ancient tales as though they were true and accurate.

WHAT evidence? A book of stories that cannot be shown to be true? Take my word for it (or his or this book? Emotional appeals? Threats and promises for after you die?

Read the Gospels with an open mind and get to know Jesus...watch the debates on the Resurrection.

Read the gospels with an open mind is about as likely as multiple long-dead bodies returning to life. Most of us have read the gospels many times with our own biases " positive or negative. Few are totally neutral.

I have debated the claimed resurrection many times " and would be willing to do so in Head-to-Head Debate if anyone is interested.

Have faith.

Yes, believe and you will believe. Search for truth and verifiable evidence and you may not.

[For_The_Kingdom]

Although I am winding down my participation in threads, I cannot resist replying to this one.

I told myself I wouldn't reply to any threads/posts until I created my KCA thread...but I couldn't resist replying to yours lol.

Disagreed. I apply the same level of scrutiny and demand for verifiable evidence to ANY claim of importance that I am asked to accept as truthful and accurate (historical, theological, scientific, everyday world).

Then perhaps you should be take an agnostic approach when it comes to things like abiogenesis and evolution.

My standards for acceptance are consistent. A double standard applies when one accepts and makes decisions without verifiable evidence regarding religious tales but is more demanding of evidence when making decisions on financial matters.

dou-ble stand-ard
noun
a rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups.

Yes, they could be true, could be false, could contain much truth, could contain little truth.

Indeed.

That IS the question. Care to take a stab at answering?

Here? Now?

Feel free to begin whenever you are ready. Readers will likely look forward to the evidence you have to present (as would Christian scholars and theologians).

My KCA thread is taking longer than expected. I am "waiting" on something, and once I have it, I will post it...and after that I will begin a series of other threads which will consist of other theistic arguments...the argument for the Resurrection will be one of them.

Kindly present evidence that soul and afterlife are anything more than imaginary.

Argument from consciousness, coming soon.

An argument is NOT evidence " it is opinion.

Ok, so when an atheist gives any of the traditional arguments AGAINST the existence of God, I will tell them "an argument is not evidence, it is an opinion".

Second, you are actually wrong. When an argument is presented, it isn't presented at face value...but rather the premises of the argument is BACKED UP by evidence, giving it truth value.

Has someone here claimed that humans are just piles of matter? If not that is a stinky fish (red herring) remark.

Red herring? No sir...on atheism, human beings don't have souls...therefore, if we don't owe our existence to a Creator, and we don't have immaterial selves (souls), then what more are we than "just piles of matter"?

Our lives are no more valuable than a flea or a tick.

Continue . . .

A soul.

I do not pretend to know the beliefs or motivations of anyone " let alone people who lived thousands of years ago, in a very different culture, with very different circumstances.

Granted.

Do you pretend to know (or actually think you do know beyond speculation and opinion)?

No. But when someone "believes" something, there is usually a reason why...and after analysis, we find that the best explanation for the disciples belief is because of the truth value of the Resurrection.

Again, feel free to begin whenever you are ready

Small steps, not leaps and bounds.

Said to be is meaningless.

How about "is a miracle". That better?

Kindly show verifiable evidence that supernaturalism was involved " something more than speculation, ancient tales, testimonials

Based on the plethora of evidence for theism, and the plethora of evidence against naturalism...there is very little (if any) doubt as to where the evidence is pointing.

Anything beyond that is denial.

Present the information for all to evaluate.

Patience my friend.

More likely than not is pure speculation / opinion / guesswork.

Actually, "more likely than not" is about all you can say when it comes to historical inquiry...unless you, I, or anyone else was there and can start dishing out absolute statements.

One can speculate about beliefs and motivations of ancient people " and pretend to know.

It is based upon other preliminary facts that supplement the belief. So for example, in 2010, I believed my wife was the woman for me to marry..and I based that belief upon certain background information that I had on her...which were preliminary facts that I had regarding her personhood, how she treated me, what she did for me, etc.

So I took all of that background information and knowledge, and I concluded that she was the one for me. It wasn't a "blind date" (blind faith). It was information, gathered over a period of time, through trial and error.

Perhaps some were motivated (felt inspired) to record stories they heard from others " since gospel writers cannot be identified with certainty, let alone be shown to have personally witnessed the events and conversations they write about.

But a case can be made that the Gospel writers were in fact either Apostles, or friends of the Apostles...and at the very least, the original "story", a case can be made that it came from the original Apostles.

Dozens of books and articles have been written about this subject over the past century...so none of this stuff is new under the sun.

Opinion noted

LOL.

Certainly. I did not drink the Kool Aid of religious indoctrination so I feel no compulsion to defend ancient tales as though they were true and accurate.

Probably because you were busy drinking the wine of scientific indoctrination..but that is neither here nor there...because after all, if Christianity is true, then you would essentially be indoctrinated with the truth, right? Anything wrong with that?

Read the gospels with an open mind is about as likely as multiple long-dead bodies returning to life. Most of us have read the gospels many times with our own biases " positive or negative. Few are totally neutral.

Heb 11:6

"...anyone who comes to him (God) must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."

If you don't have an open mind, then conversation is futile.

I have debated the claimed resurrection many times " and would be willing to do so in Head-to-Head Debate if anyone is interested.

I will accept a Head-to-Head debate with you if you make the opening argument.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 566 by For_The_Kingdom]

Heb 11:6

"...anyone who comes to him (God) must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."

If you don't have an open mind, then conversation is futile.

It seems to me here that FtK has his own personal definition for 'open mind'. To me, 'open mind' means being open to a possibility, willing to grant that it might be true, to look at evidence, evaluate and come to a conclusion. Did Jim murder Bob? I don't know, it might be true. Let's look at CCTV footage, examine fingerprints on the murder weapon and find out.
However, here, it seems clear to me (hopefully to other readers as well) that 'open mind' in FtK-speak means 'must believe'. The thing being investigated (does God exist?) cannot have the status of possibility, it has to be given the status of actuality right from the get go. If applied to the murder hypothetical just above (Did Jim murder Bob?) we must believe that Jim did murder Bob before we investigate any evidence. This taints the investigation in that our belief would cause us to reject anything that conflicts with our a-prior belief. I see this in the Statements of Faith of creationist websites such as AnswersinGenesis; they proudly proclaim an a-priori belief in the infallibility of what the Bible says and proudly admit to rejecting any evidence found that contradicts that. Thus, their investigations are tainted.

My KCA thread is taking longer than expected. I am "waiting" on something,

Usually when something is in scare quotes, it indicates that it means the opposite of what is in there. So...you're not waiting on something?

When an argument is presented, it isn't presented at face value...but rather the premises of the argument is BACKED UP by evidence, giving it truth value.

Is this a not so subtle way of attempting to say that when someone gives an argument, it is to be considered true by default, that it is to be considered backed up by evidence by default?
I could give an argument that the Greek gods live on Mount Olympus, and say outright that my premises are backed up by evidence, thus giving my argument 'truth value' right out of the gate, before my argument has even been discussed.

Our lives are no more valuable than a flea or a tick.

To whom? You do realize that value/worth is a subjective thing right? My life is valuable to me, and I consider my life more valuable than that of a flea or a tick. If I had to choose between a mosquito drawing blood from me (and potentially giving me a fatal disease) and my life, I will choose my life.
Value/worth isn't just an objective thing that somehow transcends everybody's opinion.

No. But when someone "believes" something, there is usually a reason why...and after analysis, we find that the best explanation for the disciples belief is because of the truth value of the Resurrection.

I'm willing to bet money that the arguments you'll make about this here can be applied to pretty much any religious group, thus meaning that any religious claim is equally as valid (if your logic is applied consistently).

Actually, "more likely than not" is about all you can say when it comes to historical inquiry...unless you, I, or anyone else was there and can start dishing out absolute statements.

Great! I'm going to copy this into a document and quote it back at you when you later on make claims about what the apostles were thinking and doing.

So for example, in 2010, I believed my wife was the woman for me to marry..and I based that belief upon certain background information that I had on her

You yourself knew this woman, had met her, talked to her, learned things about her and from her.
Can you say the same about the apostles, about Jesus?
I cannot. I recognise that those people have been dead for 2,000 years or thereabouts, so I cannot pretend to know what was in their minds. Only speculate on what was written down by/about them.

Consider this - Take all the information you knew about your to-be wife, just prior to your asking her to marry you (or she asked you, which ever happened). Now, pretend that you had never actually met her, but the very same information was handed to you in a book written by someone else.
Would you read that information, consider it and then make the decision to marry this woman, despite having not met her?
The reason I ask this is that this is essentially what I see and hear Christians asking ME to do. They are telling me to take this book with tales about Jesus and to, for lack of a better term (or they actually use the term, in ttruscott's case) marry Jesus, despite not having met him (and not being able to meet him, ya know with him being dead and all).

But a case can be made that the Gospel writers were in fact either Apostles, or friends of the Apostles...and at the very least, the original "story", a case can be made that it came from the original Apostles.

Can you actually show this case to be true?

[Zzyzx]

.

I will accept a Head-to-Head debate with you if you make the opening argument.

Excellent. I am willing to make the opening argument.

We can make arrangements via PM.

[tfvespasianus]

Red herring? No sir...on atheism, human beings don't have souls...therefore, if we don't owe our existence to a Creator, and we don't have immaterial selves (souls), then what more are we than "just piles of matter"?

Our lives are no more valuable than a flea or a tick.

The first part of this opinion is coherent. That is, atheism does contend that people are without a divine creator. Additionally, the second portion we a just piles of matter is true as far as it goes (i.e. it comports with an atheist POV) in that an atheist wouldnt contend that humans consist of anything immaterial. However, the idea that therefore the atheist must believe as a consequence of this that human lives are no more valuable than any other living things (why limit it that because why need we make a distinction between animate matter and inanimate matter?) is not the necessary corollary to the preceding positions. That is because a great deal of what we value is notional. Examples are numerous, but people value art in all of its forms with varying intensity and, moreover, with all of the disputes about what art actually constitutes. People may value minerals wholly aside from any intrinsic value (e.g. diamonds). One may say that Christians dont value things beyond their idea of divine imperatives, but I think thats demonstrably untrue. So, what are we left with? All of us decide on a daily basis what is important/valuable to us based not on inherent factors, but based upon our sensibilities. I accept that this is true and I enjoy living.

Take care,
TFV