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]

.

Are we still at war? I hope not.

I am not at war but at debate. It makes no difference who is behind the words / ideas presented since personalities mean very little to me.

There are no gods in Atheism.

Although true there are no gods in Atheism, does that necessarily mean that God of the Bible is non-existent?

Atheism is NOT a claim that gods do not exist.

Careful reading of my statement There are no gods in Atheism says NOTHING about the Bible God (other than it is not believed by Atheists).

Would the sun automatically disappear from the sky if someone claims theres no sun?

Is this offered in reasoned adult debate? Has someone made that claim? Or is it a stinky fish (red herring) dragged across what should be a reasoned debate?

If God is truly non-existent, may I ask why is there so much back-breaking effort by atheists to defend the supposed state of Gods non-existence as if trying to force God out of existence?

Many Atheists disagree with having the religious beliefs of others thrust upon them in any way.

Perhaps Christians would understand that if they considered their own response if Islamic beliefs and practices were thrust upon them.

That brings the implication that atheists know very well that God exists but denies the fact. Is that right?

Many Theists appear to believe that.

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.

But the items you listed are dependent on the religion variable.

I disagree. Mores, ethics, morals, laws, customs need not be related to religion.

As impossible to serve more than one master, so is it true with more than one religion master.

That is a false statement. Ask anyone who has served in the military.

Theres no neutrality between diametrically opposed religious concepts.

Perhaps that explains why religious wars are so prominent a feature in human life " people fighting and killing each other because they believe in different proposed supernatural entities " or believe in the same one but different dogma and ritual. Muslims and Christians have been killing each other for a thousand years " and different sects within each have been making war on other sects. Insane.

Neither is there any such thing as religion-neutral law. George Washington stated,

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism who should labor to subvert these great Pillars of human happiness"these firmest props of the duties of Men and citizens.

Many savvy political leaders understand the usefulness of religion the opiate of the masses.

Thanks for your reply (Post #571) to my last post #570. Are you so afraid of whats on the DVDs I suggested that you think there may be a need to debate the material? (I wouldnt suggest such.) For what if thats the case?

Fancy footwork. If you think I am afraid you have another think coming.

Try to comprehend " I do NOT watch television, movies, DVDs, pornography, performances, or YouTube. Many foolish people have attempted for fifty years to coerce me into watching their preferences for my own good " as though they know what is best for (or beneficial to) me.

Instead of participating in such activities, I read, research, write and actually experience the real world in which I live.

Silly me!

I do not disagree

I thought that the material on the DVDs would arm you with greater knowledge in addition to what we expect to gain from the debates!

That sounds like statements from the foolish people mentioned above " those who think they know what I should do with my time.

Are you telling me its not good to always increase in personal knowledge?

There are many paths to gaining personal knowledge. Not everyone chooses the same path.

You talked as if you put the material I suggested in the class with pornography? Shame on you!

CORRECTION: Read again what I said " that I do not watch any of those things " PERIOD.

If one says they do not watch football and do not watch opera, is that classing either?

Neither do I care for pornography.

So what?

Debates are good but we must caution ourselves of the danger of wrongfully using them to unsettle instead of settling things.

Debate is what we DO here.

Foundation NOT accepted

But the foundation I mentioned is indispensable. Please be careful.

Nothing you have said is indispensable (except perhaps for you or in your mind).

Try to keep in mind that this is not TD&D or HH sub-forum where the Bible is considered authoritative or proof of truth. This is C&A where that assumption does not apply.

Back to my example of a company you started: Suppose one of your employee, having no confidence in your ability to lead despite the fact that you run your company well and did nothing wrong, negates every word from your mouth as if they are all myths and try very hard to persuade others to believe that you dont exist. What would you do with this guy? Such an individual would be your showplace for how God sees unbelief.

As a former owner of more than one company, I was not concerned about an employee disliking or disagreeing with my leadership or management style " PROVIDED that they did the job for which I was paying them.

In fact, I have encountered employees who expressed that they knew more about how to run the company than I did. My response was If you are so capable why are you working for wages?

A friend had an even better response: I may not be a great manager but I can lay one million dollars cash on this table. Can you?

I have no idea how any of this relates to an invisible, undetectable, proposed supernatural entity. Many people, however, seem to think that they know about such proposed entities after reading unverifiable ancient texts, listening to sermons, and using their imagination.

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?

Whether you or I like the way Jesus died for us or not, I only know that its the only way you or I would escape the justice we both deserve.

Your belief that Jesus died for us is not binding upon me in any way. You are certainly entitled to believe that but are NOT entitled to project it onto me.

Im much thankful! Have you considered what it would be like if Jesus was not more than human? I would never want any taste of absolute hopelessness!

I understand that many people would be absolutely hopeless without their religious beliefs.

Unfortunately, many of them seem to think their personal problems / issues must be shared by everyone. Bad assumption.

The person that cant see the word of God as truthful assurance is blind to the fact that assurance awaits him.

Many of us need no assurance from proposed supernatural entities. As one who has encountered quite a few situations that were difficult, dangerous, challenging (or worse), I have NEVER, not for an instant, felt any need for supernatural assistance or assurance.

Finally, may I please leave the following items before I go with the hope that you wont be offended by them?

I am not offended " but such preaching contributes nothing to debate.

Protocol, not anti-protocol brings the rewards of protocol.

Protocol which is faulty or phony is unlikely to produce actual rewards.

Dont you think that someone deserves to be thanked for that extremely complex, priceless body of yours thats a miracle in itself?

I did thank my mother and father for the good genes " and for encouragement to (as Mom taught all four of her sons " had no daughters) THINK, then do what you decide, regardless what others think, say, or do. We have done that " in spades for many decades.

How could anyone appreciate driving a very fine car while despising its builder?

I do not care one whit about who built a vehicle I own.

If you decide to fuss about what I just said, I would much rather that you do it now because I told you rather than later because I didnt tell you.

I do not fuss " but do debate. Notice that your post did not touch on the OP question Why no straight answers?

Dancing around, talking about the Bible, and focusing on personalities / people is NOT debating the issue.

[KingandPriest]

[Replying to post 578 by H.sapiens]

Medicine relies primarily on biological sciences and, as Theodosius Dobzhansky said, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution." A physician who lacks a good, up-to-date understanding of evolution is not worth a bucket of warm spit.

I was not aware that medicine primarily relies on biological sciences. From my understanding medicine has been practiced for thousands of years before the biological sciences.

Medicine has existed for thousands of years, during most of which it was an art (an area of skill and knowledge) frequently having connections to the religious and philosophical beliefs of local culture. For example, a medicine man would apply herbs and say prayers for healing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine

Maybe you meant modern or western medicine. If you were speaking of modern medicine, then I agree it is based on the biological sciences.

Since you introduced the statements and views of Theodosius Dobzhansky, I feel it is appropriate to list other beliefs he held.

beliefs[edit]
Ernst Mayr stated: "On the other hand, famous evolutionists such as Dobzhansky were firm believers in a personal God." Dobzhansky himself spoke of God as creating through evolution, and considered himself a communicant of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodosius_Dobzhansky
Collins, Francis S (2006). The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-7432-8639-1
Shermer, M.; Sulloway, F.J. (2000). "The grand old man of evolution". Skeptic. 8 (1): 76"82

Does this mean you accept Dobzhansky's position that God created the world through evolution?

When you post actual scientific evidence rather than claptrap I'll be happy to show you where you went wrong.

Does this make you the final arbitrator of what is scientific evidence and what is not? Is only science with an understanding of evolutionary biology valid?

Considering the source is always good rule, especially when a mistaken appeal to authority is the primary evidence.

I agree it is good to consider the source, but I could not find any of your statements a worthy point to discredit the Myrna Brind Center for Integrative Medicine. Is your position that medicine can only be treated in specialties. The human body is an integrative 'machine' which requires an integrative approach to sustain health. There are different types of mechanics which focus on specifics parts of a car, tires, engine, body. When you go to a dealership for service, the dealer focuses on an integrative approach to ensure your vehicle is operating at maximum efficiency. Do you reject an integrative approach to medicine?

I have no beliefs, I deal in probabilities.

To make the claim that you have no beliefs shows exactly how far from the truth you really are. Every person in the world has "beliefs" about something. When you post a message, you believe it will be read by another person. To state that you deal in probabilities means you calculate the probability of every action you take before taking it. You would have died from stress a long time ago if this were true. Our brains need beliefs, even on a small scale to process micro decisions at a rapid pace. You may choose to call them something else because as a scientist you don't like the thoughts associated with the word belief, but nevertheless you still have them.
As a biologist, do you 'believe' in evolutionary biology or do you calculate the probability that evolution occurs exactly as proposed by evolutionary biology?
If so, what results did you yield from your probability calculations?

(BTW, thanks for the correction about MD in neuroscience. That's what I get for not proof reading.)

[H.sapiens]

[Replying to post 578 by H.sapiens]

Medicine relies primarily on biological sciences and, as Theodosius Dobzhansky said, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution." A physician who lacks a good, up-to-date understanding of evolution is not worth a bucket of warm spit.

I was not aware that medicine primarily relies on biological sciences.

That says it all. It shows what you don't know about medicine and biological sciences.

From my understanding medicine has been practiced for thousands of years before the biological sciences.

Actually a knowledge of biological sciences is what man depended upon for survival from the start. Medicine (except for some detours for things based in religion like the four humors) was an outgrowth of biological knowledge.

Medicine has existed for thousands of years, during most of which it was an art (an area of skill and knowledge) frequently having connections to the religious and philosophical beliefs of local culture. For example, a medicine man would apply herbs and say prayers for healing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine
[/quote]
Herbs were based on biological knowledge, prayers on wishful thinking.

Maybe you meant modern or western medicine. If you were speaking of modern medicine, then I agree it is based on the biological sciences.

I'll accept that as a good start.

Since you introduced the statements and views of Theodosius Dobzhansky, I feel it is appropriate to list other beliefs he held.

beliefs[edit]
Ernst Mayr stated: "On the other hand, famous evolutionists such as Dobzhansky were firm believers in a personal God." Dobzhansky himself spoke of God as creating through evolution, and considered himself a communicant of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodosius_Dobzhansky
Collins, Francis S (2006). The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-7432-8639-1
Shermer, M.; Sulloway, F.J. (2000). "The grand old man of evolution". Skeptic. 8 (1): 76"82

Does this mean you accept Dobzhansky's position that God created the world through evolution?

No I do not.
I was privileged to discuss just this question with Dobzhansky at a Zoology Department Tea following a talk by his former student, Francisco Ayala. He agreed that I had him on the basis of parsimony, but said that, "... like genes, upbringing sometimes shows through." He truly was a "grand old man" being willing to not just acknowledge, but even to yield to, an upstart undergraduate.

When you post actual scientific evidence rather than claptrap I'll be happy to show you where you went wrong.

Does this make you the final arbitrator of what is scientific evidence and what is not? Is only science with an understanding of evolutionary biology valid?

Me?
Personally?
Of course not.
Though I am comfortable representing the general consensus of science.

Considering the source is always good rule, especially when a mistaken appeal to authority is the primary evidence.

I agree it is good to consider the source, but I could not find any of your statements a worthy point to discredit the Myrna Brind Center for Integrative Medicine. Is your position that medicine can only be treated in specialties. The human body is an integrative 'machine' which requires an integrative approach to sustain health. There are different types of mechanics which focus on specifics parts of a car, tires, engine, body. When you go to a dealership for service, the dealer focuses on an integrative approach to ensure your vehicle is operating at maximum efficiency. Do you reject an integrative approach to medicine?

No. I am an advocate of integrative approaches, all oceanographers are since it is our task to bring together chemistry, physics, geology and biology. However, the term is often used in medicine as a bunch of whoey, as it appears to be in this case, leading off, as the Myrna Brind Center for Integrative Medicine does in its advertising with acupuncture and plastic surgery.

I have no beliefs, I deal in probabilities.

To make the claim that you have no beliefs shows exactly how far from the truth you really are. Every person in the world has "beliefs" about something.

Speak for yourself when you admit to your own limitations. I strive to be belief free and I suspect that I succeed rather well.

When you post a message, you believe it will be read by another person.

No I do not. I expect that it will, that it probably will be, but believe? No.

To state that you deal in probabilities means you calculate the probability of every action you take before taking it.

No again, dont confuse confirmatory statistics with exploratory data analysis, often as not probabilities are order of magnitude and it is just a case of placing them on a number line from tiny to huge, only actually enumerating them as required by ties.

You would have died from stress a long time ago if this were true.

Again speak for yourself. Perhaps your religion makes you weak?

Our brains need beliefs, even on a small scale to process micro decisions at a rapid pace. You may choose to call them something else because as a scientist you don't like the thoughts associated with the word belief, but nevertheless you still have them.

No again. Belief is an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists without a requirement for evidence. I require evidence. Are there moments when I operate on an instinctual basis? Sure. But that is no belief that is evidence based and naturally selected for (a probability based process) over billions of years.

As a biologist, do you 'believe' in evolutionary biology or do you calculate the probability that evolution occurs exactly as proposed by evolutionary biology?
If so, what results did you yield from your probability calculations?

Since there is much evidence for evolution and no evidence for the competing beliefs ... that is rather easy. The probability of evolution approaches 1.0 as a limit and the probability of creationism approaches 0.0 as a limit.

(BTW, thanks for the correction about MD in neuroscience. That's what I get for not proof reading.)

You're welcome ... But I'd observe that it probably goes more to your lack of familiarity with medicine and the sciences than it does your poor proofing.

[KingandPriest]

[Replying to post 582 by H.sapiens]

Herbs were based on biological knowledge, prayers on wishful thinking.

Do you claim that those who knew of the benefits of ginger tea for thousands of years, based this knowledge on biology?

Last time I checked, biology is a natural science concerned with the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, evolution, distribution, identification and taxonomy.

Making an herbal tea seems to depend on herbalism more than biology. If i know salt is a good seasoning for food, does this depend on biological knowledge or common sense.

Back to the original discussion, is neurological evidence that immaterail forces (such as a soul or spirit) count as verifiable? Do you reject the notion of this evidence because it may undermine what you believe to be correct?

[Yahu]

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

I suggest you read the works of Emanuel Velokovsky like 'Worlds in Collision' and 'Ages in Chaos'. He uses historical writings from cultures all over the world when major cataclysms are referenced in the biblical accounts.

For example, if the sun stood still at noon for an extended period during the time of Joshua, then other civilizations would have recorded unnaturally long evening or night. He did find those recorded in histories around the world.

Velokovsky was a Jewish historian.

[Zzyzx]

.

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

I suggest you read the works of Emanuel Velokovsky like 'Worlds in Collision' and 'Ages in Chaos'.

Regarding the sun stood still:

Joshua 10:12Then Joshua spoke to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the sons of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, "O sun, stand still at Gibeon, And O moon in the valley of Aijalon." 13So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, Until the nation avenged themselves of their enemies. Is it not written in the book of Jashar? And the sun stopped in the middle of the sky and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day. 14There was no day like that before it or after it, when the LORD listened to the voice of a man; for the LORD fought for Israel.

It would be prudent to read / study physics and astronomy to learn about the possibility of the Earth ceasing rotation for a day and starting again.

It is not surprising that ancients who thought the Sun revolved around the Earth might imagine it stopping. It is somewhat surprising how many modern people still believe stories about the sun standing still for a day. Did they sleep through high school science classes?

[Yahu]

.

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

I suggest you read the works of Emanuel Velokovsky like 'Worlds in Collision' and 'Ages in Chaos'.

Regarding the sun stood still:

Joshua 10:12Then Joshua spoke to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the sons of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, "O sun, stand still at Gibeon, And O moon in the valley of Aijalon." 13So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, Until the nation avenged themselves of their enemies. Is it not written in the book of Jashar? And the sun stopped in the middle of the sky and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day. 14There was no day like that before it or after it, when the LORD listened to the voice of a man; for the LORD fought for Israel.

It would be prudent to read / study physics and astronomy to learn about the possibility of the Earth ceasing rotation for a day and starting again.

It is not surprising that ancients who thought the Sun revolved around the Earth might imagine it stopping. It is somewhat surprising how many modern people still believe stories about the sun standing still for a day. Did they sleep through high school science classes?

Well Velokovsky also found that major cataclysms occurred at the same time. Massive earthquakes and tidal waves destroyed many civilizations at those events.

Yes it would take a lot to stop the earth's rotation like interacting with another close planetary body that altered the earth's orbit. According to recorded history, the calendars had to be reworked after that event because the orbit had changed.

In 'Ages in Chaos' Velokovsky tried to re-orient histories across the world by major events that took place worldwide and paralleled them with biblical events. So you dismiss the biblical account but what if China recorded the same events in their history of the sun stopping in its tracks for an extended period of over a day?

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 586 by Yahu]

I posted a new topic about the Earth stopping rotation http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 208#810208

[Yahu]

It would be prudent to read / study physics and astronomy to learn about the possibility of the Earth ceasing rotation for a day and starting again.

Actually my degree is in a specialized form of physics, ie electrical engineering.

You are assuming that the rotation stopped. All we know is that the sun stayed in the sky from the perspective of the observers. For all we know, a pole of the axis could have shifted temporarily due to some outside force with the pole facing the sun. That doesn't imply a stop of rotation but a wobble induced into the planets orientation. Could it be self-correcting? Yes.

Since planets have magnetic fields, another body with a magnetic field would interact with the planet in strange ways. People tend to forget that the earth is a giant magnet. Magnets do strange things when they get close to another magnet. Magnetic poles have moved or even reversed. There could be major electrical discharges between bodies....

We don't know the circumstances just the observed results.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 588 by Yahu]

Let's continue discussion of "Sun stood still" in the thread http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 208#810208

This thread topic is "Why no straight answers" and we are far afield of that.

I have made my reply in the new thread.