What type of "evidence" of God would an atheist accept?

[Ajflyguy7]

When did Christ, while embodied on Earth, ever kill anyone, or tell his disciples to kill anyone? When the Roman guards came to take Jesus away to face execution, did he order his followers to protect him, or chastise anyone who tried to physically harm others in his defense, and help to heal them?

There are many places where Jesus threatens people with eternal torture, death, or agrees with God's murderous ways.

 

[Michael]

There are many places where Jesus threatens people with eternal torture, death, or agrees with God's murderous ways.

Citation please.

Please note that there are two Jewish/Palestinian terms associated with the English term "hell", sheol and gehena. Neither of those terms describes an afterlife of 'eternal torture'. The term sheol simply refers to the concept of a physical 'grave' without any specific afterlife connotations. The other term, "gehenna", refers to a Jewish afterlife belief related a time limited "soul cleansing" process that every human must go through before entering their place in "heaven". Everyone must be cleansed of their sin while on Earth. Origin, a well respected early church "Father" of the Christian church also describes the purpose of the "fire" of gehenna. Again however, it implies no concept even remotely related to "eternal torment".

The concept of eternal torment comes from the pagan concept of "hades" introduced by Augustine in the 4th century AD.

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

Citation please.

Please note that there are two Jewish/Palestinian terms associated with the English term "hell", sheol and gehena. Neither of those terms describes an afterlife of 'eternal torture'. The term sheol simply refers to the concept of a physical 'grave' without any specific afterlife connotations. The other term, "gehenna", refers to a Jewish afterlife belief related a time limited "soul cleansing" process that every human must go through before entering their place in "heaven". Everyone must be cleansed of their sin while on Earth. Origin, a well respected early church "Father" of the Christian church also describes the purpose of the "fire" of gehenna. Again however, it implies no concept even remotely related to "eternal torment".

The concept of eternal torment comes from the pagan concept of "hades" introduced by Augustine in the 4th century AD.

Mark 9:44
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

 

[Michael]

Mark 9:44
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

That would be personal guilt, not "eternal torment" of God's doing.

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

That would be personal guilt, not "eternal torment" of God's doing.

Mark 3:28-29
28Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:

29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

Can't be more clear than eternal damnation.

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

Would Atheists believe , if they found out that speed of light is not constant ? That would take away like everything they know from science .

 

[Subduction Zone]

Would Atheists believe , if they found out that speed of light is not constant ? That would take away like everything they know from science .

Why do you think that they would not accept that evidence, if it existed? It appears that you are merely assuming that others have your sins.

 

[lesliedellow]

The concept of eternal torment comes from the pagan concept of "hades" introduced by Augustine in the 4th century AD.

When was the last time you read the NT? It must have been a very long time ago, given that you don't seem able to recall its contents.

Probably around the same time you read a textbook by an astrophysics textbook written by an astrophysicist, rather than by an electrical engineer with an agenda.

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry, YouTube videos, possibly by kooks, is not evidence. Do you have anything of substance?

ETA: He is a kook. He bases his work on cherry picking old inaccurate data. You need something that supports your claim.

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

Sorry, YouTube videos, possibly by kooks, is not evidence. Do you have anything of substance?

ETA: He is a kook. He bases his work on cherry picking old inaccurate data. You need something that supports your claim.

How are 160 official mesurements of speed of light over 350 years inaccurate data?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How are 160 official mesurements of speed of light over 350 years inaccurate data?

That is merely the claim, you need proper sources. By the way, there are no "official mesurements<sic>".

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

That is merely the claim, you need proper sources. By the way, there are no "official mesurements<sic>".

The Atomic Constants, Light, And Time

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Atomic Constants, Ligt, And Time

Sigh. Please, that is just a paper by that kook. You need as a bare minimum a peer reviewed article from a well respected professional journal.

Your poor source can be refuted by a marginally better one:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Barry_Setterfield

Please find a valid source.

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

Sigh. Please, that is just a paper by that kook. You need as a bare minimum a peer reviewed article from a well respected professional journal.

Your poor source can be refuted by a marginally better one:

Barry Setterfield - RationalWiki

Please find a valid source.

You can find valid source yourself , you know the name of the author , no matter what i show you ,you won't believe anyways so it's waste of my time . You just have faith in ahtiesm like we have faith in religion , because you simple don't want to embrace something that can contradict what you were taught .

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can find valid source yourself , you know the name of the author , no matter what i show you ,you won't believe anyways so it's waste of my time . You just have faith in ahtiesm like we have faith in religion , because you simple don't want to embrace something that can contradict what you were taught .

LOL! You made the claim. The burden of proof is upon you. And no, I told you that if you found evidence I could be convinced. Papers by kooks are not convincing.

But then you appear to be extremely ignorant on how science is done today. Do you know what a peer reviewed article is?

And no, faith is your sin, not mine.

 

[lesliedellow]

The Atomic Constants, Light, And Time

In 1862 the speed of light was measured to be 298,000 +/- 500 km/sec, whereas in 1972 it was measured to be 299,792.4562 +/- 0.0011 km/sec. So if you wanted to make any kind of facetious claim at all, you could claim that it is speeding up.

Since 1983 the metre has been defined in terms of the speed of light.

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

LOL! You made the claim. The burden of proof is upon you. And no, I told you that if you found evidence I could be convinced. Papers by kooks are not convincing.

But then you appear to be extremely ignorant on how science is done today. Do you know what a peer reviewed article is?

And no, faith is your sin, not mine.

You didn't even bother reading what i show to you , before you even open the link you alredy gave that guy title "kook" , you are the ignorant one , if authour of that article would be Stepean Hawking you would read it .

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

In 1862 the speed of light was measured to be 298,000 +/- 500 km/sec, whereas in 1972 it was measured to be 299,792.4562 +/- 0.0011 km/sec. So if you wanted to make any kind of facetious claim at all, you could claim that it is speeding up.

Since 1983 the metre has been defined in terms of the speed of light.

You show difference between two ouf of 183 from that article , consider taking all the data not selecting small part of it to make your point.

 

[lesliedellow]

You show difference between two ouf of 183 from that article , consider taking all the data not selecting small part of it to make your point.

It is your creationist friend who was being economical with the truth. Notice the much much tighter tolerances with the 1972 measurement compared with the 1862 measurement. The fact that the metre has repeatedly been redefined, in order to render the definition more exact, makes comparisons moot in any case.