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.
Yes. You're probably thinking we needed to go to space to prove the Earth revolved around the sun, but that isn't so. We tracked the revolutions of the Earth as well as the revolutions of all the other planets as well as the position of all the stars in the sky relative to us so that there was no possible way for us to view the predictable pattern we saw without the Sun being the center of the solar system.Do we have the evidence that the earth is revolving around the sun, or the existence of black holes before we believe that they are plain facts?
Nope, not true. I don't trust a scientist when he states something. I look at his evidence and judge it. The scientist gathers information to be judged, I don't take his word for it. If I think his evidence might be false, I can do the same experiment or gather data through the same means to find if his evidence is real or if he made it up. Sometimes they do, most times they don't. When they do they get caught eventually.Humans rely on believing other humans to get to a truth. This is almost exclusive employed as this is the only efficient way for humans to get to a truth at all.
Nope, not true. I don't trust a scientist when he states something. I look at his evidence and judge it. The scientist gathers information to be judged, I don't take his word for it. If I think his evidence might be false, I can do the same experiment or gather data through the same means to find if his evidence is real or if he made it up. Sometimes they do, most times they don't. When they do they get caught eventually.
How is that a problem, in that context?You are confused. You are actually talking about science as a repeatable truth. Not all kinds of truth is repeatable. What evidence can you exam for a historical figure said and done 3000 years ago? You've got no evidence whatsoever but to put your faith in what is written in a book.
How is that a problem, in that context?
I do not see where I made any such assumption.The problem is that you assumed everything is a science while in reality it's not!
What "truths" are you alluding to, and by what methodology did you make these determinations?To simply put, not every kind of truths can be evidenced.
Do you mean "truth" as an opinion, or "truth" as having the state of being true?And actually humans in majority don't rely on evidence to get to a truth, including a scientific truth.
Hahaha!You are confused.
Nope, I'm not.You are actually talking about science as a repeatable truth.
True, that's why I didn't claim it to be the other way. I talked about evidence, not experiments exclusively. I said evidence can be gathered in other ways than experiments. See here:Not all kinds of truth is repeatable.
I didn't edit the post, but I did add the bolding so that you can see the word you missed.I can do the same experiment or gather data through the same means
Archaeology and Philology.What evidence can you exam for a historical figure said and done 3000 years ago?
Testimony that can not be cross examined and or supported with objective evidence, is not worth much and muat taken on faith.
Testimony that can not be cross examined and or supported with objective evidence, is not worth much and muat taken on faith.
Most science is not soft science, this would be incorrect.
Testimony that can not be cross examined and or supported with objective evidence, is not worth much and muat taken on faith.
I understand social psychological manipulation. I understand having deception so deep that you cannot actually detect it within yourself. But as it relates to sheer numbers.....is the power of the Gospel to change people toward the positive, it's own proof?
what I mean is that no one can prove God. You can't stick him in a testube and say, yup there is a God. But when you see the volume of lives changed in history and even today....toward the positive.
How can you deny that this is not a supernatural act?
I'm aware that my testimony could be chalked up to "delusion" or "brainwashing" and these are not lost upon me. I retain my insatiable need for knowledge.I pray for clarity and I stay up on nights such as this and research BOTH sides of the argument. Atheist and Christian sources. I will humbly admit some questions remain unanswered. But despite MANY hours spent enveloped in research, dialoguing with atheists, agnostic teachers of my near by high school, christian pastors, and even a fair share of Muslims, my faith has yet to be rooted out or proven wrong.
Psychology is evidence-basedmost science is softer and not objective evidence. So does that mean we must take all soft science, like psychology etc on faith as well?
First of all, why would you credit the Gospel with the change?
Psychology is evidence-based
well I said "Power" of the gospel to change.
this Bible paraphrase states what I was talking about with the power of the Gospel, being the power of God to save people:
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?