To the logically/scientifically minded...

Originally posted by JesusServant
We are asked at times to prove our beliefs, "but don't quote the Bible". 

Click to expand...

It's not scientific or logical thinking to use circular logic to "prove" your beliefs. Using a logical fallacy defeats the purpose.

We are challenged to 'think' as if we are stupid, 'search' as though we haven't looked and 'prove' what only God Himself can show.

Click to expand...

You can only use "what only God Himself can show" because anything else is mere speculation and you can make up anything as an excuse. Take for example people who claim water split apart a supercontinental landmass which not only created separate continents that we see to day but also the Biblical deluge when in fact there is zero evidence for this (nor is it possible from an energy standpoint), but people use this anyway with the excuse that "through God anything is possible". Well, by that "logic" I could just as easily replace your God with any other magical being and have an equal amount of validity to my argument whether it be unicorns or aliens.

unworthyone: I heard of God. I looked around and saw His world of evidence. I went looking for God. I found God.

Pretty scientific isn't it?

Click to expand...

As a matter of fact, no. This problem is known as "confirmation bias," and must be corrected for when it arises in scientific endeavors, as it is known to give erroneous results.

I heard of God. I looked around and saw His world of evidence. I went looking for God. I found God.

Pretty scientific isn't it?

Click to expand...

What Ifrit said.  Science does not work this way.

Faith isn't about God proving Himself to us, why would he have to?

Click to expand...

Well you believe in him, don't you?  Since there's no scientific evidence to suggest that any gods exist, you must be working on faith.  No?

Here's something for the logically minded even though it is hard to believe.  God walked in the garden with Adam and Eve until they sinned.  Why?  because anything sinful cannot exist in His presence, because God is the positive end of the spectrum.  He is nothing but good.  When this all ends there will be a split in our universe and evil will be in one existence and good will be in another.  If God was the only intelligent being on his side of the spectrum, it would in fact be a very "lonely" place as you put it.

Click to expand...

Ehh, what about that was logical?

And I'm stull curious: Why did god create humanity again?  Lonliness is not a good thing, yet god is all good. 

Who said 'lonely' wasn't a good thing?

Click to expand...

Uh.  Who here things being lonely is a good thing?

He just had something better in mind.

Click to expand...

Something better?  You mean there was room for improvement?

What's the greatest example of love on this earth or in this lifetime hannover?  What would be your example?

Click to expand...

I dunno.  I'd have to think about it.  What's your point?

Me, I like to be alone now and then

Click to expand...

Being alone is different from being lonely, I think.  If being alone is better than having friends, then why create humans?  And if having friends is better than being alone, then why was a perfect being lacking something in the first place?

Do you not agree, this world could improve???

Click to expand...

The world?  Sure.  But god?

Maybe a better question is, have you ever experienced love, if so, what would be a good example of it and maybe even some scientific "proof" it indeed exists.

Click to expand...

Empirical evidence: I've experienced it.  Is it exactly what you have experienced?  No.  Do we both think of the same things when someone says 'love'?  Probably not.  Yet we both know it exists, just like we both know hate exists.

Originally posted by JesusServant
I too have a scientific way of thinking.  God knew this when he set forth events that would rock my very being to the core.

We, Christians, are at a disadvantage in the forum of apologetics.  We are asked at times to prove our beliefs, "but don't quote the Bible".  We are challenged to 'think' as if we are stupid, 'search' as though we haven't looked and 'prove' what only God Himself can show.

Click to expand...

As usual I am too late in a given discussion.

My thoughts on this.

For that that Christians claim God is omnipresent, God is hard to find. In other words not God but the Christian definition of God may be faulty. This may be the reason to quote the Bible is risky.

Another sample: Christians claim the Bible is the Word of God and should be used as evidence for God. The Bible claims God to be omniscient, yet He produced a contradictory work of literature. Thus either God can not write or people made the Bible from scratch. You see when one gets when one applies rationality to believe? You can't win.

I am also human. As such I do not think in logical term at all times. I allow myself the luxury to believe in a personal God. I will not defend my belief with logic or my scientific mind. I just use my freedom of thought. It says that the world, as we know it, is unlikely to have popped up into existence by itself. In other words the idea that God gave one a scientific mind to prove God with is a fallacy. If this were though, God would already be a proven fact. Since God created humans, humans had this scientific mind from the beginning, thus everyone should be able to find God scientifically.

We ask you not to quote the Bible because it isn't proof of anything other than that human beings claimed a lot of stuff in it.....

But when we give evidence that the Bible is God's word (there is plenty of it). It is quickly dismissed also. This does get frustrating. But, as long as a take a day off this forum every once in a while, I handle the frustration pretty well.

Originally posted by HannoverFist
  But I don't think that's our fault just because we're using science and logic. 

Click to expand...

Proverbs 14:12
        There is a way which seems right to a man,
        But its end is the way of death.

Proverbs 12:15
    The way of a fool is right in his own eyes,
    But he who heeds counsel is wise.


 

Originally posted by Rae
We ask you not to quote the Bible because it isn't proof of anything

Click to expand...

Is it the whole Bible you do not like? Or is it just the parts about how you are not to suffer a witch to live?

*sigh*

Not another "Prove God using Science" thread.

The proof of the existance of God lies outside the realm of scientific data and emperical evidence.

Also, I am moving this to the Science forum.

Oh my goodness JohnR7 I can't believe you said that.

Originally posted by JesusServant
There are no contradictions in the Bible that, with study, can be understood...  This (although not perfect) is a sample of many of the so-called contradictions answered...

http://debate.org.uk/topics/apolog/contrads.htm

here's another...

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-bible-contradictions-refuted.htm

The first is better than the second.  You guys crack me up how you refute the Bible and know little about it.

Bear:  I never once said to prove God with science, it's everyone else that tries to refute Him with it.  Science, to me, is the study of God's work by man.  Like they're looking for a rock that says "made by God" or "made in Heaven" or something.  Understanding how the world works doesn't refute the existence of God.

Click to expand...

Hmm, tempting. - Keep in mind any discussion between Islam and Christianity I stay away from. To compare the gospels and find contradictions is Childs play. None of those accounts where written at the time when Christ lived, therefore one should expect some inconsistencies, and not dwell on them. If you where hoping I throw those simple types of inconsistencies on the table I have to disappoint you, I take God and my belief in Him dead serious. Who knows perhaps you can help me find my way back into Christianity? So let me ask the first question.

Matthew 2:22-23 (NIV)
But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets: "He will be called a Nazarene."

There are two problems with this. I looked through the Old Testament no such phrase can be found. Neither the Talmud (Joshua 19:10-16) nor Josephus even mentions this village in their respected documents.

Which prophet was Matthew referring too?