Independently repeatable evidence that God interacts with our world

[Astrid]

On the contrary, there are much evidence to show that the bible is credible, some of which are:

1. biblical events happened in Egypt, assyrian , babylonian, persian and roman empire . Israel was invaded by Assyrians and Babylonian.

2. Pilate pontius and Herod existed, both of whom are mentioned in Scriptures. There are more characters including king David, Solomon and Jesus. Places like Galilee, Judea and Israel existed.

3. Although the bible is not about science, it made some accurate scientific statements way before science discover the earth was round (The prophet Isaiah said this about 450 BC. It is he who sits above the circle of the earth (Isaiah 40:22), implies earth is round.
JOB 26:7 He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing. In this science age, we know the earth suspend on nothing, but 3000 years ago it was inconceivable, yet the Scripture says it before)

We cannot demonstrate that everyone or everything in the bible happen, especially characters such as Noah and Abraham, but neither can we disprove them. Just because we don't have evidences does not mean they were fictional. But since much of the bible is credible, it gives us ground to believe that earlier part of the bible is true as well.

If a person perjurs himself in court, all else he says
loses credibility.
Of course the Bible has many authors, and some write
of things as undeniable as, say, the existence of Egypt.

What the provablyu ntrue parts ( such as flood,
If read as historical) say about credibility of the
whole as god- inspired / inerrant is also obvious.

Again, you offer bad evidence for credibility.

 

[AV1611VET]

"Nobody would die for a lie" does have a kind of catchy logical finality to it. It clearly is convincing for you.

Used to try to sway an atheist though it's so flawed that it's better not to even-sorry-trot it out yet again. It's weary and lame.

It applies to the authors of the Scriptures.

Would you die for a joke you started, if all you had to do to stay alive is admit it was a joke?

Of course you wouldn't.

But that's exactly what happened to the human authors of the Scriptures.

 

[AV1611VET]

Calling someone a liar is quite churlish, btw, mentioned here with no expectations of an apology.

Is Kent Hovind a liar? Ken Ham? Matthew? Mark? Luke? John? Paul? James?

 

[AV1611VET]

Again, you offer bad evidence for credibility.

Would you recognize it, if he offered good evidence for credibility?

 

[roman2819]

Of course not.
You offered what I termed the " nobody die for lie" argument.
I said it's as shabby and senseless as other things such as
weeping statues offerd as evidence.

That you take that as evidence that I would misquote
you and that I am a liar serves as an excellent illustration
of the very point I was making about foolish eagerness
to seize any ort of dim "evidence" that props up what
a person has chosen to believe.

Calling someone a liar is quite churlish, btw, mentioned here
with no expectations of an apology

You have reading and comprehension problem. And maybe even mental when you see words like weeping statute and shroud which I didn't write.

 

[AV1611VET]

You have reading and comprehension problem.

Wait until you get accused of "knowing more than any scientist on earth," for daring to believe something the Bible says happened, that scientists say can't happen.

We've already been through the accusations of being too dumb to breathe; now we know more than any scientist on earth.

As the saying goes:

If Satan can't get you to put on the brakes, he will get you to step on the gas.

 

[Astrid]

You have reading and comprehension problem. And maybe even mental when you see words like weeping statute and shroud which I didn't write.

Doubling down on it. Tsk.

You used what I referred to as the "nobody
dies for a lie" argument. You took many words
to describe the idea. I condensed it.

As for the weeping statues, again, I did
not attribute them to you.

One more try. The die- for -a -lie argument
(that you used) is as shabby as the shroud,
weeping statues, and divers other such
(used by others). Easy. As I expect you know.

It is usually the case that people who go for
personal attack rather than addressing the
substance of post are violating forum rules.

 

[Astrophile]

Although the bible is not about science, it made some accurate scientific statements way before science discover the earth was round (The prophet Isaiah said this about 450 BC. It is he who sits above the circle of the earth (Isaiah 40:22), implies earth is round.

Isaiah 40 is part of deutero-Isaiah, which was written about 530 BC, not 'about 450 BC'. This was during the lifetime of the Greek mathematician Pythagoras (ca. 582-500 BC), who also proposed that the Earth is spherical. Pythagoras may have got the idea from the Babylonians, who were the leading astronomers of the early 1st millennium BC. Also, the interpretation of the phrase 'the circle of the Earth' is obscure; it may have meant 'the vault of heaven' or 'the circular observable horizon' rather than saying that the Earth is a sphere - Isaiah 40 - Wikipedia .

JOB 26:7 He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing. In this science age, we know the earth suspend on nothing, but 3000 years ago it was inconceivable, yet the Scripture says it before)

The Earth is not suspended on nothing; it is in orbit around the Sun, so Job 26:7 is inaccurate. Also the book of Job was written between the 7th and 4th centuries BC, not 3000 years ago - Book of Job - Wikipedia .

 

[Astrid]

Isaiah 40 is part of deutero-Isaiah, which was written about 530 BC, not 'about 450 BC'. This was during the lifetime of the Greek mathematician Pythagoras (ca. 582-500 BC), who also proposed that the Earth is spherical. Pythagoras may have got the idea from the Babylonians, who were the leading astronomers of the early 1st millennium BC. Also, the interpretation of the phrase 'the circle of the Earth' is obscure; it may have meant 'the vault of heaven' or 'the circular observable horizon' rather than saying that the Earth is a sphere - Isaiah 40 - Wikipedia .



The Earth is not suspended on nothing; it is in orbit around the Sun, so Job 26:7 is inaccurate. Also the book of Job was written between the 7th and 4th centuries BC, not 3000 years ago - Book of Job - Wikipedia .

Be nice now, he's given his absolute best.

 

[partinobodycular]

Would you die for a joke you started, if all you had to do to stay alive is admit it was a joke?

People may not die for a joke, but they'll readily die for a lie, and it really isn't all that hard to find evidence for that, in fact all that you have to do is look back to Jan. 6th. It's amazing what people will do in defense of a lie, and the fervency with which they'll cling to it. People are willing to suffer and die for a great many things, all under the guise of moral certitude, and it was no different 2000 years ago. Give people a lie to rally behind, and yes, they'll be willing to die for it.

People are irrational. Separating fact from fiction, especially self-affirmed fiction, isn't something that they're particularly good at, and unfortunately, getting them to die for that fiction isn't all that hard to do.

 

[Astrid]

People may not die for a joke, but they'll readily die for a lie, and it really isn't all that hard to find evidence for that, in fact all that you have to do is look back to Jan. 6th. It's amazing what people will do in defense of a lie, and the fervency with which they'll cling to it. People are willing to suffer and die for a great many things, all under the guise of moral certitude, and it was no different 2000 years ago. Give people a lie to rally behind, and yes, they'll be willing to die for it.

People are irrational. Separating fact from fiction, especially self-affirmed fiction, isn't something that they're particularly good at, and unfortunately, getting them to die for that fiction isn't all that hard to do.

Careful. If you say " die for a lie" you will be accused of habitual
prevarication.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Earth is not suspended on nothing; it is in orbit around the Sun, so Job 26:7 is inaccurate.

Job 26:7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Despite what academia teaches when it gives equal airtime to myths about how the Earth is held up, the above passage shows that neither turtles, elephants, Atlas, nor any other persons or animals in mythology hold the Earth up.

That verse is saying God hanged the Earth on nothing; not that the Earth is sitting atop Atlas or elephants or pillars.

So academia's attempt to give equal airtime to myths can just take a hike.

 

[AV1611VET]

People may not die for a joke,

Thank you.

That's all I'm asking.

What academia teaches about the human authors of the Scriptures can take a hike.

 

[partinobodycular]

What academia teaches about the human authors of the Scriptures can take a hike.

Absolutely, stick to scripture, you wouldn't want to muddle up a good legend with a silly thing like the truth.

 

[St. Helens]

ADMIN HAT ON

ADMIN HAT OFF​

 

[Landon Caeli]

MOD HAT ON​

​

​

MOD HAT OFF​