Something in the Bible that is actually supported by evidence

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Science is well-known to use the names of gods or other mythological personas of all varieties for naming things.

Mars, the Oedipus Complex, and the Prometheus Project are examples.

Define 'science'
 
Upvote 0
H

Huram Abi

Guest
The Bible itself has withstood far more serious critical examination then anyone on these forums can possibly manage. The Bible has stood the test of time and weathered the many attacks on it's historical veracity better then any from antiquity.

If you are ever seriously interested in learning what an actual examination of the Bible as history includes let me know. Until then have fun with these fallacious rhetorical ploys, I don't know why but it seems to please your secular masters.

Have a nice day :)
Mark


Saying that "the bible has stood the test of time" is a false assertion. We've only been closely examining it with skepticism for a few hundred years and only stands up because people have placed more value in faith than evidence, so, when it comes time to decide if the bible is historically accurate, those people choose faith to make their assessment, not evidence. Av is a good example.

But what is funny is that among those with the most resources and a vast collection of artifacts to perform such tests and truly examine the evidence, ahem, the RCC, a large number of higher clergy have determined that the bible fails as a historical or literal document.

To them, it holds allegorical and metaphorical truths, but isn't, at least regarding the OT, a reliable document for determining historical events or their true outcomes.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
28,243
12,996
Seattle
✟895,313.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Saying that "the bible has stood the test of time" is a false assertion.

Based on what criteria.

We've only been closely examining it with skepticism for a few hundred years and only stands up because people have placed more value in faith than evidence, so, when it comes time to decide if the bible is historically accurate, those people choose faith to make their assessment, not evidence. Av is a good example.

Only God in His physical form is beyond sight of human eyes, to approach God in this way requires a condition called 'holiness'. Anyway, faith in the actual 'seeing' of God does not exclude phenomenon of miracles. The Bible actually basis credibility on the prediction and literal fulfillment of prophecy.

The problem with the evidence is that if the New Testament is right, you already have it:

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. (Romans 1:20)​

Now I spend a great deal of time looking at the evidence, considering arguments for and against, mostly against. The Bible is not a story book that was made up as they went along, there are internal, external and bibliographical tests.

But what is funny is that among those with the most resources and a vast collection of artifacts to perform such tests and truly examine the evidence, ahem, the RCC, a large number of higher clergy have determined that the bible fails as a historical or literal document.

The RCC like the Orthodox Churches, Protestant and virtually all Christian scholarship hold those texts up as redemptive history. We determine (by we I mean Christians) whether or not the testimony is worthy of faith based on our persuasion from the credibility of the text.

You are so stuck up on that word, 'literal', it's not based on private interpretation, it's not based on systematic interpretation, translation or whatever you like to call it. It's based on the various historical books that are cleared identified and intended to be, historical.

To them, it holds allegorical and metaphorical truths, but isn't, at least regarding the OT, a reliable document for determining historical events or their true outcomes.

There is a criteria for that you know? We are not talking about allegorical and metaphorical truths that are like chasing ghosts in the fog. Tangible, explicit testimony to Genesis in the New Testament clearly indicates it was regarded as literally, historical. Now if you want to talk about evidence, how about you compare a couple of choice historical books from the New Testament to any other document from the ancient world? Then. tell me what one would reasonable criteria for determining the 'genuineness' of the text.

Here is one approach:

Rule One: Sufficient Probability That Their Testimony is True
Establishing Truth by Competent and Satisfactory Evidence
Tests for Credibility:
Their Honesty
Their Ability
Number and Consistency of Their Testimony​
Coincidence of Their Testimony with Collateral and Contemporaneous Facts and Circumstances
Acquiring the Value and Force of Demonstrations (Greenleaf, Testimony of the Evangelists)

Now that is intended as an example of how a credibility criteria would look for an honest examination of the facts. However, the facts are clearly defined by the narratives blending into a complete description of redemptive history past, present and future. While that seems incredible and perhaps laughable to the modern secular mind, the Bible as credible history is a subject that has come up constantly throughout history. The undeniable truth here is that neither science nor religion get to define how the Bible gets interpreted, the Bible (authors of books...etc) gets to determine that.

Miracles are what these dreary debates are about. The credibility of the testimony of Scripture must be factual, not because I say so, but because that is what the Bible actually says.

The foundation of our religion is a basis of fact--the fact of the birth, ministry, miracles, death, resurrection by the Evangelists as having actually occurred, (Greenleaf, Testimony of the Evangelists)​

The truth is, you have no idea how Christians investigate and defend the credibility of the Scriptures. The truth is that you have not offered a single scientific or religious reason why the Bible cannot be trusted. You have not even demonstrated an understanding of what it actually says.

Pontificate about science all you like, you got a lot to learn about Christian and Jewish scholarship before you start making categorical rejections as if it were a conclusion. Stop pretending this is a scientific conclusion based on evidence, you have not the slightest interest in the evidence. What you are doing comes before an empirical test, based almost entirely on a assumption of exclusively naturalistic causes. A practice, falsely so called, science.

So what is your definition of 'science'?

Have a nice day :)
Mark
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

OllieFranz

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2007
5,328
351
✟23,548.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
As far as I'm concerned, my obligation to the discussion ended when I showed Christ in secular writings -- as in the calendar.

Even you guys use Him in science; ever heard of El Niño?

That's your problem, not mine.

Sorry, no. The weather event is not named for the Christ child, unless you are claiming that He also has a sister. Ever heard of the La Niña winds?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,667
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,437.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Ever heard of the La Niña winds?
Yes:
Ya -- like El Niño and La Niña.

Those names are allowed in science books; but that's as far as it goes.

It's okay to preach science in church, but preach church in science and scientists will eek and ook about it.

Unless, of course, the main Players are reduced to monikers.
Hold on a second, bro.

This isn't just any weather pattern, this is La Niña!

You know who La Niña is, don't you? Jesus' sister! :sick:

These guys would have a fit if anyone said that Katrina was sent from God, but higher academia names these weather patterns after El Niño and La Niña, and they don't bat an eye.

Keep the Ten Commandments off the courthouse lawns, take IN GOD WE TRUST off our coins, don't teach God in science class; but deep in the halls of higher academia, God gets ridiculed so subtlety, these guys don't even know it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
J

Jazer

Guest
Yes, I would be skeptical examining a book that would not be compiled for another 600 years myself. ^_^
Moses had all of God's plan of salvation. But a lot of what we receive from Moses was what the Bible refers to as shaddow and types. So "600 years" later when Jesus came we have a lot better of a understanding. Clearly you are learning new things about the Bible every day. WE all are learning more and more. There was a lot the disciples of Jesus did not understand. They did not understand about the diet laws, they did not understand about God's plan for the Gentiles and so on. Just like there are things that we are learning today and trying to understand. Most people have a very long way to go just to begin to understand what God reveiled to Moses 3500 years ago.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,141
Visit site
✟98,005.00
Faith
Agnostic
Accurate and factual has never been a problem. The problem seems to be in the ability people have to be able to understand the Bible. Now we have a better understanding then ever before, but people want to hold onto their traditions. Eden was all about biodiversity. Evolution teaches us a lot about biodiversity. But people still do not get it. They still do not understand what Eden was all about.

The problem is that people fail to understand how evidence works.

Let's use an example that we both lack a belief in: The Heaven's Gate cult. I think we can both agree that there was a cult who all killed themselves. I think we can agree that their leader, Marshall Applewhite, was a real, historical person.

So can I cite these facts as scientific evidence that these people had their souls moved into a UFO in the Halle-Bopp comet? Yes or no?
 
Upvote 0
J

Jazer

Guest
means that Jesus walked on water? Or even actually existed?
You do not think that Jesus existed? You do not believe that Jesus was a real person? As far as walking on water, we are told that Peter was briefly able to walk on water. But not for long because he did not have enough faith. You should be able to relate to Peter. Every now and then you will briefly start to see it. Then you lose your faith and you start to sink and go back into the dark water of doubt and unbelief.
 
Upvote 0
J

Jazer

Guest
So can I cite these facts as scientific evidence that these people had their souls moved into a UFO in the Halle-Bopp comet? Yes or no?

Are you suggesting that we should listen to one of the greatest men of science and what he tells us about this subject?

"Cambridge University physicist, Stephen Hawking was the guest lecturer at the second Millennium Evening at the White House on March 6, 1998. With President Bill and Hillary Clinton looking on, Stephen Hawking admitted the possibility of a UFO cover-up during the C-Span television's coverage of "Imagination and Change: Science in the Next Millennium." Professor Stephen Hawking often considered one of brightest men on Earth, who authored "A Brief History of Time" was a guest lecturer. Stephen Hawking after comments about the growth of population and scientific knowledge stated, "Clearly the present exponential growth cannot continue indefinitely. So what will happen? One possibility is that we wipe ourselves out completely by some disaster such as a nuclear war. "There is a sick joke that the reason we have not been visited by extra-terrestrials is that when a civilization reaches our stage of development it becomes unstable and destroys itself. "Of course it is possible that UFO's really do contain aliens as many people believe, and the government is hushing it up" I wouldn't like to comment on that. "Personally I believe there is a different explanation why we have not been contacted, but I won't go into it here. "However, even without that, there is a very real danger that we will kill everything on this planet now that we have the technological power to do so. Even if we don't destroy ourselves completely, there is a possibility that we might descend into a state of brutalization and barbarity like the opening scene of "Terminator": Thanks to Pat and Tony Craddock," UFOs & Stephen Hawking
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,141
Visit site
✟98,005.00
Faith
Agnostic
Are you suggesting that we should listen to one of the greatest men of science and what he tells us about this subject?

I am suggesting that you actually focus on the question that I asked.

Let's use an example that we both lack a belief in: The Heaven's Gate cult. I think we can both agree that there was a cult who all killed themselves. I think we can agree that their leader, Marshall Applewhite, was a real, historical person.

So can I cite these facts as scientific evidence that these people had their souls moved into a UFO in the Halle-Bopp comet? Yes or no?
 
Upvote 0

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Supporter
May 10, 2011
10,483
3,582
Twin Cities
✟724,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
I don't get why an atheist would even care what the Bible contains. Unless you want it to be real so you can finally believe? It's too bad you were blessed with too much intelligence and not enough faith. See faith is the thing that separates humans from animals. Feeling God's presence goes beyond IQ. It's about Love. THere is a level of peace that absolutely can not be achieved without communion with a higher power. Doesn't always mean Jeudao-Christian God. COuld be meditation and seeking within instead of with out. Still you atheists will always be searching for truth always be searching for answers until you find what you are searching so longingly in your heart. God. Don't be afraid because you can't hear him. You can't hear him because you are not listening. I am proud of your high level of intelligence. Most atheists seem to be of a high IQ and it is a hard burden to bear. You can figure out most of the mysteries and equaisions of man but this one,,,,,THis one you can't figure out. It's not one for your mind, it's for your spirit. You must open your spirit. You may not believe but you do have one. You can cry. You can feel other people's suffering. This is humanity and it is only given to us and we may share our spirit selves with our creator and the sustainer of our lives, of our world, can you feel nothing for the one that made you? You cannot hear the call of the one that holds your soul in care? Try to feel and not just think, it is what makes us human and not animals. If you cannot use your spiritual intelligence. Leave the spiritual beings alone and go to your microscopes and science projects. Please let the spiritual beings be and stop trying to bring your falsehoods in front of our creator. Respect other peoples beliefs and go be with your own kind.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Supporter
May 10, 2011
10,483
3,582
Twin Cities
✟724,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Really?
You think they are searching for the truth?
They sure have a funny way of looking for it.

I'm trying sooo hard to have compassion. Why are they here? They must be hearing some kind of calling to come to a Christian website. Then I start thinking maybe they are here working for someone else.
 
Upvote 0