The Evidence War

[chrispalasz]

Please take the time to read this entire post.

This thread is created for posts that:

1. Show evidence supporting the view that Christianity holds the Truth about God and humanity.

2. Show evidence supporting the view that Christianity does not hold the truth about God and humanity.

Evidence posted must be according to one of the two definitions, or it will not be deemed sufficient as evidence. All debate arising from posted evidence should be addressed using counter-evidence [counter-evidence defined as evidence that goes against or attempts to falsify or discredit evidence already posted].

Evidence, on this thread, is defined as follows:

1. Of or having to do with a material object that demonstrates, makes clear, or ascertains the truth of the very fact or point in issue;

2. A matter of record, or writing, or by the testimony of witnesses, enabling one to pronounce with certainty; concerning the truth of any matter in dispute.

[worship-your-mother-she-i]

I didn't ask the purpose of life, I asked what caused life. I am not quite sure why you think I believe it is a philosophical question and responded as such.. What I believe is the cause of life?First I dont have that question in my mind at all.Its a bad philosophical question our ancestors tried to find an answer to

I leave that question to scientists.I dont believe i will benefit by researching that.For me it doesnt matter at all.What matters is "I am here". I dont trouble myself by asking "why I am here"

So because this is not important to you, as you are not a scientist then it shouldn't be important to other non-scientists?

Willingness to leave these questions to science is an example of faith in science, how is that any different than a Christians faith in God?

What caused life is a bad philosphical question and a good scientific question. You dont expect theologists to answer scientific questions, do you?Or would you expect science to answer questions like "should I wear a jeans or cotton pants to my college?" You wont.Address the question to the proper fields.

For me "what caused life" is unimportant. If you can prove to me that it is important for me to know,then go ahead. If anybody wants to find out answer to this question I would recommend a science journal and not a holy book.Because the methodolgy followed by the science journal is more credible than the holy book.

I dont intend to leave this question to science alone.If any other field can convince me as of how their methodolgy is superior than science, then I would be happy to listen to such field. I dont think in lines of "Only science can answer this", but I think in lines of "science answers this questions better than other fields".

I might be wrong.Maybe theology better answers this question as you claim.So if you can come up with a satisfactory answer as of how your methodology is superior than that of science's is, I am willing to listen to it with all my attention and an open mind.

If you can prove that "what caused life" isnt a bad philosophical question I am willing to listen. If you can prove that "what caused life" is the question which is paramount in my life or will be useful to me, I am willing to accept it.

I always question my current beliefs.I am always willing to see the usefulness of other new beliefs.If you have anything that can benefit me better than my current belief sets, please put them forward on the table with logical explanations. I might be wrong, but tell me how I am wrong please.

[chrispalasz]

worship-your-mother-she-i wrote: What I believe is the cause of life?First I dont have that question in my mind at all.Its a bad philosophical question our ancestors tried to find an answer to.And everybody came up with an universal answer."Purpose of life is to reach jesus","purpose of life is to worship allah" and so on.I dont have that question in my mind.That question has caused millions of deaths all over the world,has divided nations and have driven men crazy enough as to kill 650 school children in russia and send planes into WTC killing innocent lives.

So basically...
"Where did life come from?"
"All religions are wrong because... I don't think about that question."?

worship-your-mother-she-i wrote: I leave that question to scientists.

Are you going to leave it up to scientists to find out what happens after a person dies, too? All they have to look at to answer a question like that is a dead person. Relying on a scientist to tell you how life began and why will never get you these answers. It's out of the scope of their profession.

worship-your-mother-she-i wrote: I dont believe i will benefit by researching that.For me it doesnt matter at all.What matters is "I am here". I dont trouble myself by asking "why I am here" and again getting thousands of answers from 1000's of religions.

When you go to work in the morning (let's pretend you DO go to work in the morning), does it THEN matter why you're "here"? If you don't know why you're at somewhere... how are you going to know what to do when you're there? If you were hired for a job, went in one morning and just did whatever you wanted and then told your boss "I dont believe i will benefit by researching that.For me it doesnt matter at all. What matters is 'I am here'", you'd be fired in a heartbeat.

Of course it matters why you're here.

[bernee51]

I bet it will survive for eternity.

(Pedantic rave...}This is logically impossible. Eternity as I understand it is time without beginning or end. Christianity clearly has a temporal starting point - ergo it is not eternal.

My view is slightly different. Eventually human spirirtuality will evolve beyond the need to externalise the sacred. When this occurs all exoteric religions will make way for the esoteric which is True Spirituality (TM).

Not true. These other things will pass away when all things not eternal pass away.

Buddhism is ahead (temporally) of christianity at the moment. As it is not a theistic philosophy I believe it will outlive the all monotheisic traditions.
.

I've seen many atheists be defeated by their own paradoxal, unreasonable, and hypocritical beliefs, on this forum, in other forums, and in life with their very own words. The truth is that people see the arguments that they want to see.

Funny - I can say exactly the same thing about christians.

Atheists are on one extreme end of the religious spectrum, and ultra-conservatives are on another end.

I would place atheists outside the religious spectrum as atheism is not a religion or system of belief.

The only wordly reasonable stance is Agnosticism which sits in the middle and always is seeking for answers. They profess to know no answers, and this is one strength. To deny that God exists is an absurdity. To claim knowledge that God exists is an absurdity to those without the Holy Spirit.

You have stated this before but I do not take it as a given.

Do you deny that Zeus exists or just do not know?

Do you deny that Odin exists or just don't know?

I do not believe your god exists and as a self defined logical impossibility I "know' the JCI god does not exist.

Faith in Jesus Christ is a sense, just like the others, that produces knowledge. A person is only truly complete with the Holy Spirit, the knowledge that Jesus Christ is God. Can we see everything that we can feel? Can we taste everything we can hear?

I can make exactly the same claims re my own subjective spiritual experiences and the knowledge I have gained from them - and you cannot deny them. They are as true to me as your faith in Jesus is to you.

[Piper Plexed]

Note to worship-your-mother-she-i,
Just wanted to drop a note, didn't want you to think poorly of me for not responding, I was hit pretty hard with the Flu on Sat and probably won't be around much till I am feeling better , Sorry. Regards, Piper

[worship-your-mother-she-i]

So basically...
"Where did life come from?"
"All religions are wrong because... I don't think about that question."?

Are you going to leave it up to scientists to find out what happens after a person dies, too? All they have to look at to answer a question like that is a dead person. Relying on a scientist to tell you how life began and why will never get you these answers. It's out of the scope of their profession.

When you go to work in the morning (let's pretend you DO go to work in the morning), does it THEN matter why you're "here"? If you don't know why you're at somewhere... how are you going to know what to do when you're there? If you were hired for a job, went in one morning and just did whatever you wanted and then told your boss "I dont believe i will benefit by researching that.For me it doesnt matter at all. What matters is 'I am here'", you'd be fired in a heartbeat.

Of course it matters why you're here.

I dont say all religions are wrong because I dont think about that question.I say you guys give answers which are not based on rationality and logical analysis.Such answers have no empirical proof and no basis except faith.And that faith too doesnt have logic as a base.So I doubt the answers given by all of you except science.They dont have faith as a base.

Obviosuly i am going to leave "what happens after a person dies" to lawyers,family and funeral companies.I dont think science has anything to do with this.If they want to analyze this scientifically they're welcome.If religions too want to analyze this they are welcome.But please show some acceptable proof for whatever you find out. If you think you can answer this question, be my guest.But show some evidence and lets analyze it then.

Ya,if i tell to my boss "I dont know why i'm here" he will fire me.But who is the boss of this world?You say its god,but i have never had any sort of communication with him.All I have is you guys saying we have a boss,thats all.I say "if we have a boss,show some proof for his existence" and you guys dont do it.so why should i be afraid of an imaginary boss?

[samuelbb7]

While Science can answer a number of questions it can only speculate on others. It has guesses but no real answer. Whether Science has an answer depends on the questions. For instance If I ask does the earth orbit the sun they can answer yes. But if I ask how life began they cannot answer since the scientist were not there. Nor do they have a way to ascertain what happened. So they can only speculate based on certain assumptions. IN the recent National Geographic article on is Darwin wrong the answer the magazine gave was no he is right. But in the midst of proofs there were admissions of missing 999 out of 1000 parts of the puzzle. Of Scientist guessing one thing but finding out it was something else. As assumptions are shown wrong and guesses found to be incorrect The theory is modified changed and adapted.

The question was asked about the fact of the age of the earth. But there are actually three current guess on the age of the earth. 4.2 , 3.8 or 4.9 billion years old. So no science cannot answer as a fact the age of the earth they can only guess.

GOD in the Bible says He knows because he was there. If the bible is correct many of the assumptions made by scientists are incorrect. If there was one world wide disaster of a flood instead of a number of disasters like evolutions speculate then their assumption are wrong. I read proevolution books and watch their shows. I used to believe in evolution but I truly examined the evidence and decided the Bible had better answers. Can I answer all the objections to the point of no doubt? NO. But I am willing to gamble. Also the Bible has prophesied much that is happening so why should I think it is all wrong.

[ENIGMA]

The question was asked about the fact of the age of the earth. But there are actually three current guess on the age of the earth. 4.2 , 3.8 or 4.9 billion years old. So no science cannot answer as a fact the age of the earth they can only guess.

If you were unsure, offhand, exactly how many floors the Empire State Building has, should you accept someone's assessment that there are, in fact, 6 floors in the entire Empire State Building?

GOD in the Bible says He knows because he was there. If the bible is correct many of the assumptions made by scientists are incorrect. If there was one world wide disaster of a flood instead of a number of disasters like evolutions speculate then their assumption are wrong.

If pigs could fly...

I read proevolution books and watch their shows.

Which books did you read? Do tell...

[Arch]

Make Believe is neither logical or illogical it is simply, creative.

The human minds has the capacity to be creative and imaginative. If it doesn't know something. It can imagine what the possible now matter how improbable answers COULD be.

We the no one had travelled to circle of the earth, imagination said hey the world is flat. Not only is it flat but at the end where you fall off the earth their are dragon that devour your ship. This is the creativity of the minds of humans.

But still no matter how creative the mind and how elaborate the story and even no matter how probable it seemed at the time. The world was not flat, the sun was not pulled behind a chariot around the earth and contrary to the bible you can't not go to the top of any mountian on this planet and see all the kingdoms of the earth.

So lack of knowledge gives way to the imaginary, yet lacks of knowledge does not give credence to those imaginary Concepts.

So

Are you going to leave it up to scientists to find out what happens after a person dies, too? All they have to look at to answer a question like that is a dead person. Relying on a scientist to tell you how life began and why will never get you these answers. It's out of the scope of their profession.

Relying on the imagination of men is just the same as relying on science, for the most part one is a product of the other. Seeing that one usually imagines something first then it becomes a physical manifestation by working toward that thought or image.

[youngborean]

In an effort to respond to the initial post I will offer 2 pieces of what I consider evidence.

1. The existence of Israel. One of many fufilled promises of God, to keep his people. Other "greater" cultures have come and gone, yet they have stayed in tact and retained the texts that found Christianity.

2. The existence of anti-semitism.

I believe the purpose of my God is to answer the questions that rational thought cannot answer. Let's look at anti-semitism. There is not a rational way to explain such specific racism over time, other than a hatred of the promises of God. Therefore, one must ask where this hatred comes from. The same philosophy that makes people love God and his people, (spiritualism) must therefore be the force that drives people to hate. Unless someone can offer a rational explanation of anti-semitism. Since this specific hatred thoughout their existence cannot be answered by rational thought, where does it exist. Why does the existence of Israel envoke such emotional responses in people throughout the world? In my mind, Israel exists as a physical promise of God, therefore the devil will try to discredit any physical evidence. Hence, the appearance of anti-semitism. I believe the same applies for the existence of evil and suffering in general. Unless someone can offer a rational explanation of these things.

[worship-your-mother-she-i]

While Science can answer a number of questions it can only speculate on others. It has guesses but no real answer. Whether Science has an answer depends on the questions. For instance If I ask does the earth orbit the sun they can answer yes. But if I ask how life began they cannot answer since the scientist were not there. Nor do they have a way to ascertain what happened. So they can only speculate based on certain assumptions.
The question was asked about the fact of the age of the earth. But there are actually three current guess on the age of the earth. 4.2 , 3.8 or 4.9 billion years old. So no science cannot answer as a fact the age of the earth they can only guess.

GOD in the Bible says He knows because he was there. If the bible is correct many of the assumptions made by scientists are incorrect. Can I answer all the objections to the point of no doubt? NO. But I am willing to gamble. Also the Bible has prophesied much that is happening so why should I think it is all wrong.

Samuel,it is indeed a hilarious argument when you said "But if I ask how life began they cannot answer since the scientist were not there".And you are forgeting the difference between estimation and speculating.Scientists are estimating and not speculating.When scientists say life began before 4.2 billion years to 4.9 billion years, it doesnt mean that they are confused.If you read any statistics book you will find something called as confidence intervel.So scientists give a range for the possible age of life which is 95% correct or 99% correct according to the confidence level used. This is actually a sampling error.For example if scientists get a cloth which is supposed to be worn by jesus.To test its age they will take sample fabric from the cloth.And the each fabric might give a different age like 1999.99 years ,2000.001 years, 2000.002 years etc.So they deduce the mean and standrad deviation and use the Z test to determine the age within a confidence limit of say 95% or 99%. The statement should be read as "we are 99% confident that the age of this cloth is between 1999.99 years and 2000.001 years"

This is the best science can do.And it accepts it frankly.If you ask science to dig every inch of earth and to test every single sample in the world it cannot do that.It is not needed also.All the modern inventions we have like TV,cellphone,internet etc were created only by this process.So it serves no purpose in riduculing it saying its inaccuarte and erratic.

This is the best process we have.And even in the best process we have there are limitations.There isnt anything called as 100% foolproof scientific process.But religion doesnt even come any close to this process.

When somebody does a research and says earth is 4.3 to 4.9 billion years old, we have to give that argument more weight since it is based on the best research process we have. But to ridicule that research and to believe that earth is 6000 years old, without a shred of research is not correct decision making.

No field offers 100% correct answers. Simply reiterating that "ours is the correct answer" doesnt make the answer correct.