Science PROVES the BIBLE is True

[In situ]

There are many gifts and benefits of God that you enjoy ever day of your life.

Cherry picking and biased thinking detected....

That said I am happy for you that you live in a happy world, but the rest of use might not share your view on that - life is a hard struggle for many people.

Now before you try to call me out on blaming god, I want to point out that it is you that brought this topic to the table and that I am merely pointing to the facts that life is in fact a struggle for many people - for whatever reasons. Believing there is purpose behind everything that happens might help some overcome this struggle, but it does not in any way indicate any form of evidence that your holy book, the Bible, is proven true by science.

 

[In situ]

That is right. As a believer, I know I have Jesus in me and as a unbeliever, you can't have Jesus in you.....God willing, if you come to this point in your life and with Jesus in you, this is the knowledge and evidence you will have 1 Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

When you say "I know", what do you mean with that? How do you know?

I am a believer and because of that I believe and understand the above verse, you can't. Maybe you are here for a reason....give God a chance and see what he can do through you. God Bless

If you put it that way, then I would not say "I believe" but "I am arrogant".

 

[Born Again2004]

When you say "I know", what do you mean with that? How do you know?

Sorry, I can't explain it....you need Christ in you to do that....I have Christ in me and that's all I know.....a lot of people say they believe but don't have Christ in them and really don't understand!

 

[In situ]

Sorry, I can't explain it....you need Christ in you to do that....I have Christ in me and that's all I know.....a lot of people say they believe but don't have Christ in them and really don't understand!

But you said, and still insist in that, you know it. If you know it how come that you cannot explain your knowledge? Isn't knowledge supposed to be something one can explain? If not, then what is knowledge? Or, maybe, you do not "know" it, but only believe it? Is that what it is you are trying to say?

P.S. I think you are not supposed to say, or imply, that other Christians are not true Christians on CF. D.S.

 

[In situ]

they would disagree with the notion that one type of creature, e.g., dinosaurs, would eventually change into another, e.g., birds.

Assume the notion that "dinosaurs never turned into birds" then no Troodontids (a sister clade to birds) , such as Anchiornis huxleyi, is a dinosaurs either:

Nor is any Dromaeosaurids (2nd sister clade to birds), such a Microraptor gui, a dinosaurs:

Nor is any oviraptor, such as Khaan mckennai, a dinosaur:

So what are birds, troodontids, dromaesaurids and oviraptors if they are not dinosaurs? Are they all birds, or are they all variations of dinosaurs or are they something else? And what exactly is the disagreement about "needed changes" you mentioned? What changes are needed to "turn" a bird into a dinosaur?

Hardly any I would say... and that is the evidence all YEC's continues to deny into absurdity because they cannot, and will never, admit they are wrong once they claimed a "truth".

 

[joshua 1 9]

life is a hard struggle for many people.

Really there are people somewhere that do not have to struggle? Where are these people? It has a lot more to do with your attitude then it does how easy or hard your life is. As a Christian we know that God will cause all things to work out for the best for us.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Sorry, I can't explain it....you need Christ in you to do that....I have Christ in me and that's all I know.....a lot of people say they believe but don't have Christ in them and really don't understand!

Each individual has to discover truth for themselves. WE can help them but we an not do it for them. In public school far to often they are spoon fed and do not even know how to learn.

 

[joshua 1 9]

And in what respect is personal opinions and beliefs scientific evidence?

Not evidence for science, this is the motivation or the catalyst for scientific discovery. You need a left and a right hand, you need a left and a right brain, you need science and religion. You need intuition and analogical thinking. Discovery requires BOTH and you can not put any emphasis on one or the other.

 

[In situ]

Someone pointing out that you posted a quote-mine does not give you the right to call them a liar and lower than slime.

For correctness, I was not called a liar, but was accused to call the person in question a liar. This was not my intention. I understand it can be misunderstood this way, and that is a misfortune on my behalf. That missfortune made the person in question upset. Unfortunalty, I am not perfect and cannot control how people react to what I write, but this serves as lesson to me as well.

 

[In situ]

Each individual has to discover truth for themselves.

What use is there of "personal truth", i.e. subjective truth, if anything then can be "true"?

 

[In situ]

Not evidence for science, this is the motivation or the catalyst for scientific discovery. You need a left and a right hand, you need science and religion. You need intuition and analogical thinking. Discovery requires BOTH and you can not put any emphasis on one or the other.

Your claim was that there exists scientific evidence that proves the bible to be true. Now you have change this to be some kind of mumbo-jumbo metaphysical evidence nonsense. Do you even know what a scientific evidence is? I doubt it... (Btw, who did mention something about shifting goal posts before?)

Needless to say, this nonsense still does not count as scientific evidence that "proves" the Bible to be true.

And no, I don't need religion to explain reality. In my opinion, reality is better (meaning: simpler and more likely) explain without religion. A cornerstone of religious gullibility (read: accepting "truths" with no evidence to support it more than "I said it is so") is to assign a purpose to natural events where there probably and most likely exists none. I understand this view point might make life easier for some people, things "makes sense" to them, and I am not to say they should not believe their exist a purpose, but I do say there are alternatives that just as well, and more likely, can be true. Alternatives you deny even exists and refuses to acknowledge.

In my opinion, you have a Black&White view of reality, it is your way or the highway, isn't it?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Were are these scientific evidence?

What do you want evidence for? For the last 100 years most of the evidence for the Bible has been archaeology to substantiate the Historical accuracy of the Bible. So there is an overwelming abundance of historical evidence for the Bible. Now there is an abundance of DNA evidence for the Bible. For example both Judea and the Muslims claim Abraham for their father. Now we have DNA evidence to show this is true. They may fight with each other but they both share the same Y Chromosome.

 

[bhsmte]

What do you want evidence for? For the last 100 years most of the evidence for the Bible has been archaeology to substantiate the Historical accuracy of the Bible. So there is an overwelming abundance of historical evidence for the Bible. Now there is an abundance of DNA evidence for the Bible. For example both Judea and the Muslims claim Abraham for their father. Now we have DNA evidence to show this is true. They may fight with each other but they both share the same Y Chromosome.

Using this logic, the harry potter books are historically accurate as well.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What use is there of "personal truth", i.e. subjective truth, if anything then can be "true"?

There is more debate over absolute truth. I have a brother that is a Buddhist that claims that he is absolutely sure that the only absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth.

I read a book once called: "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds". We made a LOT of money off of what I learned from that book. The Bible talks about how we can be of one mind and one accord. If we have the mind of Christ. The popular book: "To Kill a Mockingbird" talks about a group think and crowd or mob mentality. My wife has her degree in Sociology. If you want to get into objective and subjective truth in terms of philosophy there is not much I can do to help you there. I suggested that my son sign up for a philosophy class and he did not think that there was any value to that for getting a job. He does not want to live his life in an ivory tower, I raised him to get out and function in the real world.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Using this logic, the harry potter books are historically accurate as well.

I doubt it, but go ahead and show me your evidence. I do not question the ability of harry potter to teach witchcraft. I am sure that Rowling's books are effective at getting the job done. That is why she is a Billionaire. I am sure we could find wicca child around here somewhere if you want a discussion on how accurate Rawling is in teaching paganism and witchcraft.

 

[In situ]

WE can help them

Your view on Christianity is not every Christains view of Christinaity. Therefore, do not write "we" when you for all practical purpose actually mean "I".

 

[In situ]

There is more debate over absolute truth. I have a brother that is a Buddhist that claims that he is absolutely sure that the only absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth.

Okay. Now let me see if I get you straight here, the so called "scientific" evidence you claim support the Bible is only personal opinions (about science) which happens to agree with your opinion on the matter. Is that correct understood?

 

[Born Again2004]

Needless to say, this nonsense still does not count as scientific evidence that "proves" the Bible to be true.

It has been proven that the chance of Jesus being who he said he was is 10 to the power of 17...that is 1000,000,000,000,000,000 : 1

 

[In situ]

If you want to get into objective and subjective truth in terms of philosophy there is not much I can do to help you there.

You brought it up, by referring to peoples opinion about science. I.e. I only respond to what you write (hint: it is known "listing" to what others says).

For the record, this is not the first time you bring up a subject and then "accuse" me for have started it. For instance your long winded replies about skeptic dot com, which you then ended with the absurd demanded that I need to defend their claims (claims I do not even know about).

 

[In situ]

It has been proven that the chance of Jesus being who he said he was is 10 to the power of 17...that is 1000,000,000,000,000,000 : 1

Am I supposed to be impressed by some, out of the air, claimed probability? Do you care to show how it was derived or am I supposed to believe it to be true because "you said so"?

That said, even if Jesus existed etc, how is this a scientific evidence that snakes can talk and angels and demons exists? (I mean, you are aware of that the scientific evidence does tell us that the vocal cord of snakes make it impossible for them to make any sound even remotely close to a human voice? And you might as well consider that not even the vocal cord of chimpanzees can produce human sounds. Not to mention the scientific evidence which dispute the claim wooden sticks can turn into snakes. And what are the scientific evidence that a burning bush can talk?).