Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
There is just oodles of room for interpretation, the entire thing can be seen as an illusion, or a metaphor, or a threat, or a work of art, or a research base, or a mistake...the possibilities are uncountable.
"Physically real evidence contrary to a super natural Creator is utterly impossible."
Physically real evidence, that is contrary to literalist ideas absolutely does exist.
For example:
If someone suggests that there was a global flood that was responsible for the deposition of the world's strata, and you point out that throughout that strata, there are footprints from animals that have walked through, the evidence suggests that on the contrary to a global deluge, life existed in the past as it does today.
Just curious. I really don't.
A miracle, by its strictest definition, is something that cannot be explained or proven through any effort or understanding of man.
if we had a big enough laboratory we could do it ourselves,
So if you came over to my house and I pulled a cake out of the oven before your eyes, you believe that the cake could be an illusion?
Just curious. I really don't.
If you don't believe the beginning of Genesis actually happened then you have no reason to believe anything else in the Bible, and it gives no reason for Jesus to have died. Richard Dawkins is hardly an expert on religion but he could see the implications: "Oh, but of course, the story of Adam and Eve was only ever symbolic, wasn't it? So, in order to impress himself, Jesus had himself tortured and executed for a symbolic sin committed by a non-existent individual?"Just curious. I really don't.
I said " the entire thing can be seen as an illusion" and here is just some of the ways how,
The world is an illusion: 8 mind blowing theories
Another is here,
"But for there to be natural behavior as revealed through appearance, there has to be something that behaves and appears to begin with. In other words, there has to be nature-in-itself. The problem is that comparing behavioral predictions to empirical observations cannot reveal nature as it is in itself, for many different hypotheses regarding the latter are consistent with the same behaviors."
Why dismissing philosophy threatens the integrity of science ~ Metaphysical Speculations
I stand by my point that there is actually plenty of "room for interpretation", and that your perspective is dependent on intangible, unproven, ideas.
There is always another side, always another take on matters. If the other side/s see the light of day is another matter. It's the same way how the media portrays some things and ignore others. If you want to get along, want to be with that crowd getting their back slapped and promotions you don't make waves and possibly lose your job, no you do what you are told even if it's one-sided and portrays a group or a cause in one light only. If a scientist is locked into a belief-and don't say they are impartial when it comes to the theory of evolution they are not, they are invested in it. They only ever look at things from the established point of view.
Startling evidence for Noahs Flood - creation.com
A detailed statistical analysis of these data led to the conclusion, with a high degree of probability that the fossil tracks must have been made underwater. Whereas the experimental animals produce footprints under all test conditions, both up and down the 25° slopes of the laboratory ‘dunes’, all but one of the fossil trackways could only have been made by the animals in question climbing uphill. Toe imprints were generally distinct, whereas the prints of the soles were indistinct. These and other details were present in over 80% of the fossil, underwater and wet sand tracks, but less than 12% of the dry sand and damp sand tracks had any toe marks. Dry sand uphill tracks were usually just depressions, with no details.
And if someone suggests that a donkey can talk, the sea part and someone dead for 3 days can rise from the dead, many may say evidence suggest to the contrary.
If I am guilty of the crime of believing in what I see,
Beyond that, to be fair, if the world were an illusion, even my scripture would be a part of that same illusion.
Richard Dawkins is hardly an expert on religion but he could see the implications: "Oh, but of course, the story of Adam and Eve was only ever symbolic, wasn't it? So, in order to impress himself, Jesus had himself tortured and executed for a symbolic sin committed by a non-existent individual?"
It is not a crime to believe what you see, based on the assumption it is there. In my in humble opinion you possess every right to base your beliefs on anything you choose to trust, including your physical senses and scientific data. So does everyone else, even people who choose a basis different to you.
Yes, because the Bible is a collection of books, but would the God who is referred to with the words "In the beginning God" still exist ?
Well, we could, but we choose not to.
I can accept the possibility that all physical reality is an illusion. Who is your "we"?
then how would you even know if Jesus existed,?
I would not know. Why would my awareness or even my existence be required for Jesus to exist?
What I am pointing out is that neither of us, actually believes that what we see is a mass illusion (even though we both accept that it is a possibility).
If we did, we probably wouldn't be Christian.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?