How to prove God exists.

[Radrook]

In what way is that calling you names? You claimed that the Bible says that God hung the Earth on nothing and provided a passage to support your claim. I simply posted a passage that claims the opposite.

Surely you aren't saying that we are allowed to just pick and choose what parts of the Bible we can take and ignore the rest?

Well, being referred to as a fool and stupid isn't exactly what one might consider praise.
No, I never claimed that we should read biblical texts and interpret them out of context.

 

[bhsmte]

Well, being referred to as a fool and stupid isn't exactly what one might consider praise.
No, I never claimed that we should read biblical texts and interpret them out of context.

How do you test if a biblical text has been interpreted correctly?

 

[HitchSlap]

How do you test if a biblical text has been interpreted correctly?

Generally speaking, whatever it takes to align with your personal values and opinions.

 

[Kylie]

For Someone who doesn't exist, you guys sure give Him a lot of quality airtime.

Even Rome, which was polytheistic, didn't want to include Him in the equation and invested a lot of their resources in trying to suppress Him.

Just like scientists do today.

Does that mean that all those creationists getting upset about evolution and trying to disp[rove it are really proving that evolution is true? (I'm looking at you, Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron!)

 

[Kylie]

2. Existence is of two kinds in the most broad dimensions of existence: necessary existence, transient existence.

Sounds to me like you are claiming that necessary existence is a thing just so you can claim God fits into that category.

You can't define things into existence.

This is just the first cause argument. It's been refuted.

 

[Kylie]

... Nice try.

I'm convinced.

 

[Kylie]

Actually it's one of the places Christians were told to go.

Matthew 22:9 Go ye therefore into the highways,

You got any evidence that when the author wrote that, he was talking about the internet?

 

[Kylie]

Well, being referred to as a fool and stupid isn't exactly what one might consider praise.

And where in that post did I call anyone a fool?

No, I never claimed that we should read biblical texts and interpret them out of context.

Then why is it that you posted a passage from the Bible to support the "earth hangs on nothing" position, yet failed to mention that the very same book of the Bible says that the earth has pillars? Do you not want us to have the full picture? Are you trying to present a biased view of the Bible, a view biased in favour of your own position?

 

[AV1611VET]

You got any evidence that when the author wrote that, he was talking about the internet?

Is the Internet not the "information highway"?

 

[Kylie]

Is the Internet not the "information highway"?

A nickname which certainly didn't exist back when the passage was written.

Again, I ask you, what evidence do you have that the author of that passage was talking about the internet?

 

[Strathos]

You got any evidence that when the author wrote that, he was talking about the internet?

In context, it's about people going to gather guests for a wedding. This is a parable BTW.

 

[AV1611VET]

A nickname which certainly didn't exist back when the passage was written.

Again, I ask you, what evidence do you have that the author of that passage was talking about the internet?

Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

Don't forget ... Job mentions electronic communications ... which would [come to] include the Internet as well.

Job 38:35 Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are?

 

[Kylie]

Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

None of those things show that the author was talking about the internet.

Don't forget ... Job mentions electronic communications ... which would [come to] include the Internet as well.

Job 38:35 Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are?

Wow, this is quite a stretch.

And again, you have absolutely no support for your interpretation.

 

[AV1611VET]

None of those things show that the author was talking about the internet.

Science is myopic.

And had the Bible mentioned the Internet by name, then unbelievers would be harping on anachronisms.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

They obviously consider it an insignificantly small price to pay for the sacred sake of scientific advancement. In that sense science itself has become a god to be worshipped above all others.

It's called secularism. It's in your constitution.

 

[Radrook]

And where in that post did I call anyone a fool?



Then why is it that you posted a passage from the Bible to support the "earth hangs on nothing" position, yet failed to mention that the very same book of the Bible says that the earth has pillars? Do you not want us to have the full picture? Are you trying to present a biased view of the Bible, a view biased in favour of your own position?

Because the only response to my comment that appears on my screen are quotations involving foolishness and stupidity. So what am I supposed to think?

About the pillars, all authors are allowed to shift between the factual and the symbolic except the Biblical authors? We use the term "ends of the Earth". Are we being literal? Or when we say that we are so hungry we can eat a horse? Are we being literal? I have heard some arguments that say that the continents are elevated above the sea floor and in that sense look like pillars. But I always understood it as a mere figure of speech. However, describing the Earth as being hanged on nothing doesn't come across that way. Well, at least not to us who are not constantly seeking ways to discredit the Bible it doesn't.

 

[Loudmouth]

And no, there has been no new post from Loudmouth;

Yes, there has. Post 1086, please.

I will just talk now about my insights into atheists' ways and means of wrong thinking, in denying God to exist,

Seriously? How many times do we have to say that we don't deny that God could exist?

I must ask myself and you all dear everyone here, Why a Christian forum allows and even welcomes atheists to operate here at all?

If your beliefs can't stand up to criticism, what does that say about your beliefs?

 

[Loudmouth]

Because the only response to my comment that appears on my screen are quotations involving foolishness and stupidity. So what am I supposed to think?

It appears that you are the one who can't see things that are presented to you.

 

[Kylie]

Science is myopic.

And had the Bible mentioned the Internet by name, then unbelievers would be harping on anachronisms.

That's your excuse for everything. "X is myopic."

 

[Kylie]

Because the only response to my comment that appears on my screen are quotations involving foolishness and stupidity. So what am I supposed to think?

So the passage from the Bible that I posted is foolish and stupid?

About the pillars, all authors are allowed to shift between the factual and the symbolic except the Biblical authors? We use the term "ends of the Earth". Are we being literal? Or when we say that we are so hungry we can eat a horse? Are we being literal? I have heard some arguments that say that the continents are elevated above the sea floor and in that sense look like pillars. But I always understood it as a mere figure of speech. However, describing the Earth as being hanged on nothing doesn't come across that way. Well, at least not to us who are not constantly seeking ways to discredit the Bible it doesn't.

Ah, so it's literal if you want to interpret it that way!

Of course, back 1000 years ago, people would read those two passages and would have no idea which one - if either - was correct. Then SCIENCE came along and showed the truth, and believers jump on that to say, "Hey, the Bible was right! This proves it!" Funny how the interpretation of the Bible seems to change according to what science shows, isn't it?