When evaluating whether the claims of Christianity are true or fictional, it's important to take a step back and think about what is typically seen with regard to true beliefs and false beliefs. And, one of the most important characteristics of true beliefs is the fact that they are often independently discovered by multiple people. For instance, pulmonary circulation was discovered/theorized independently in Egypt by Ibn al Nafis and later in Europe by Michael Servetus and later still William Harvey. Calculus was independently discovered by both Isacc Newton and Gottfried Leibniz, evolution was discovered independently by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace. There are countless other examples of "multiple discoveries" of facts that can be found here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... iscoveries
The point is that rational people, who objectively search for truth, will often independently discover facts about the universe. So if Christianity and the existence of the Christian god is a fact about the universe (and we could apply this argument to any other religion/god as well), then we would expect that sincere theologians around the world dedicated to the search for God would independently discover Jesus Christ/Yahweh/Holy Spirit, and thus become Christians. As a result, we would not expect it to take 1500 years for Christianity to reach North America, for instance. If Christianity is true, then it is an objective fact and should thus be discoverable by anyone searching hard enough for the truth about the universe. So, why don't we see Christianity emerge in North or South America, Africa, or China, prior to the arrival of Christians into these parts of the world? One would expect that if Christianity were an objectively true fact, it would be independently discovered in multiple regions of the world. But, it wasn't. Quite the opposite. Prior to the invention of technologies that allowed world travel and communication, every culture had its own version of God, and its own religion. While some of these gods and religions had slight similarities, none of the matched exactly. This is strong evidence that all of these gods and religions are manmade constructs that only exist in the imaginations of humans.
So, my question for Christians is, if your religion is a fact, why was it never independently discovered by anyone? Bear in mind that not only is Christianity supposed to be an objective fact, the god is supposed to want people to know and worship him, meaning that it should be even MORE LIKELY for Christianity to be independently discovered if it is a fact than scientific and mathematical facts are to be independently discovered.
Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Student
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 8:00 pm
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 31 times
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21140
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 794 times
- Been thanked: 1129 times
- Contact:
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #101Goat wrote: ↑Sat Apr 17, 2021 1:24 pmAnd, how can that be distinguished from 'not existing in the first place'?JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 4:40 pmWell if God is omnipotent the only logical answer to that question would be because He doesn't want to.Rational Atheist wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:16 pm
And if God exists, he is perfectly capable of imparting knowledge of himself onto humans who have never heard of him. So the question is, why doesn't he?
Personal revelation serves to identify God it is not necessary to confirm his existence since the evidence of that is all round us.
RELATED POST
Why believe in ANY gods at all?
viewtopic.php?p=998032#p998032
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #102There is the claim for personal revelation. How can that be shown to be true? It might be personally convincing, and is totally emotionally based, but that is just a conviction you are right. Can you SHOW you are right?JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 17, 2021 1:36 pmGoat wrote: ↑Sat Apr 17, 2021 1:24 pmAnd, how can that be distinguished from 'not existing in the first place'?JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 4:40 pmWell if God is omnipotent the only logical answer to that question would be because He doesn't want to.Rational Atheist wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:16 pm
And if God exists, he is perfectly capable of imparting knowledge of himself onto humans who have never heard of him. So the question is, why doesn't he?
Personal revelation serves to identify God it is not necessary to confirm his existence since the evidence of that is all round us.
RELATED POST
Why believe in ANY gods at all?
viewtopic.php?p=998032#p998032
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21140
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 794 times
- Been thanked: 1129 times
- Contact:
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #103I didn't claim to be subject of personal revelation but even if I had had a personal revelation why would that need to be proven to anyone else? The whole point would be that it would have been personal. If someone claims to be a PROPHET, conveying a message from God for other, then it will come true. If it doesn't then logically it was not from God.
My point was, that there is no need for personal revelation to establish if there is a Creator but there is to learn more about that one than mere existence.
JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #104And, there is no way to show a 'personal revelation' is anything more than confirmation bias.JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 5:37 pmI didn't claim to be subject of personal revelation but even if I had had a personal revelation why would that need to be proven to anyone else? The whole point would be that it would have been personal. If someone claims to be a PROPHET, conveying a message from God for other, then it will come true. If it doesn't then logically it was not from God.
My point was, that there is no need for personal revelation to establish if there is a Creator but there is to learn more about that one than mere existence.
JW
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6002
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6627 times
- Been thanked: 3222 times
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #105And/Or a case of self-delusion inspired by deeply held religious beliefs.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #106You have not established there is a 'Creator' with or without your personal revelation.\JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 5:37 pmI didn't claim to be subject of personal revelation but even if I had had a personal revelation why would that need to be proven to anyone else? The whole point would be that it would have been personal. If someone claims to be a PROPHET, conveying a message from God for other, then it will come true. If it doesn't then logically it was not from God.
My point was, that there is no need for personal revelation to establish if there is a Creator but there is to learn more about that one than mere existence.
JW
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21140
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 794 times
- Been thanked: 1129 times
- Contact:
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #107Logically personal revelation by an Almighty God could be distinguished from wishful thinking if he wanted that to be the case. Or is your point that there is something an omnipotent God could not do?
JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21140
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 794 times
- Been thanked: 1129 times
- Contact:
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #108YOU have not established there isn't a 'Creator' (with or without your personal revelation). So? So what?! Do we need to, to participate in a discussion on the subject? If so perhaps you should be addressing the writer of the original post and not me.
I made no claim one way or the other.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #109But, as far as I can see, he hasn't. So, since he hasn't, currently he can not be distinguished from wishful thinking. If then and maybes aren't convincingJehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 24, 2021 5:09 amLogically personal revelation by an Almighty God could be distinguished from wishful thinking if he wanted that to be the case. Or is your point that there is something an omnipotent God could not do?
JW
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious
Post #110However, you made the positive claim. Therefore it is up to you to provide evidence that your positive claims is true. What you are trying to do is the logical fallacy known as 'shifting the burden of proof'.JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Sat Apr 24, 2021 5:13 amYOU have not established there isn't a 'Creator' (with or without your personal revelation). So? So what?! Do we need to, to participate in a discussion on the subject? If so perhaps you should be addressing the writer of the original post and not me.
I made no claim one way or the other.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella