It's 2019, not 1519.

[Basil the Great]

Yes, science can estimate, but even their estimates are indirect evidence for God, in the view of most theists. However, science cannot really know the size or age of the Universe.

 

[Basil the Great]

Yes, you make an interesting point, other than the vastness of the Universe seems to imply that a very powerful force must have been behind it all. Theists see that force as a Supreme Being. Again, you cannot prove that He does not exist and we cannot prove that He does exist. It all comes down to what one chooses to believe.

 

[lostinthought]

Guys, I'm tired and am off to do other things.

I'll be back in the morning and will answer each and every post.

Please, however, before you post again, learn the difference between proof, claims, circular arguments and faith.

I'm not interested in who claims what. It's meaningless, as id faith and circular arguments.

I would like to hear from anyone with any actual proof.

Night night.

 

[Speedwell]

Guys, I'm tired and am off to do other things.

I'll be back in the morning and will answer each and every post.

Please, however, before you post again, learn the difference between proof, claims, circular arguments and faith.

I'm not interested in who claims what. It's meaningless, as id faith and circular arguments.

I would like to hear from anyone with any actual proof.

Night night.

There is no actual proof. People don't believe in God because there is actual proof.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Have you been to Harvard and read all of these hundreds and thousands of books? If not, how do you know?

I get this from Gerald Schroeder. He received his PhD from MIT. MIT is across the river from Harvard. They do share each others library so I am sure that Schroeder had been there doing research when he was working on his PhD.

Actually my High School Biology teacher is a graduate of Harvard. I have studied science for over 50 years and I have studied the Bible for almost 40 years. In addition I took a Ancient History class in High School so I have studied the History of the ancient world for over 50 years also. So I know that there is vast overwhelming evidence.

"In trying to understand the flow of time, you have to remember that the entire Six Days (Genesis 1) is described in 31 sentences. The Six Days of Genesis, which have given people so many headaches are confined to 31 sentences! At MIT, in the Hayden library, we had about 50,000 books that deal with the development of the universe: cosmology, chemistry, thermodynamics, paleontology, archaeology, the high-energy physics of creation. Up the river at Harvard, at the Weidner library, they probably have 200,000 books on these same topics. The Bible gives us 31 sentences. Don't expect that by a simple reading of those sentences, you'll know every detail that is held within the text. It's obvious that we have to dig deeper to get the information out."

Gerald Schroeder - Articles - Age of the Universe

 

[Halbhh]

How do you know jesus actually had an Earthy existence?

Richard Carrier, and others, have researched the historicity of jesus and concluded that he never actually had an Earthly existence.

That was irrelevant to me at that time, as I had the goal of reading all the wisdom I could find, very widely from around the world, and became interested in Jesus's sayings in time (after reading various other wisdom traditions of many kinds previous to reviewing his), because I could see his sayings would be able to create peace even between nations or groups that had fought many wars or had ongoing anger. Obviously such principles would be of great value, if they worked.

To create a situation of lasting peace between people, which for instance requires groups have a change of heart and forgive past grievances for instance, just as Jesus taught.

It's totally irrelevant other topics like whatever people can ask, when you are trying to simply learn and consider wisdom sayings. You don't truly care of Lao Tzu lived here or there, is considered a legend, whatever. All fully irrelevant to considering the wisdom sayings.

Instead, to me the goal was to learn the precise ideas and consider or learn how well they worked, when applied to life.

But what do you do when one figure in particular starts batting 1,000 (always getting everything 100% the best form of any anywhere) -- getting each principle you can test or compare fully into a perfect form that is superior to other competing ideas about how to live? Well, if you are objective, then you notice that, and try to learn more.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

This therefore begs the question: How and why do people become Theists and, given the lack of evidence and recent scientific research, remain so.

Ah there's nothing like Circular reasoning!

 

[BNR32FAN]

Whoa wait.... you cannot reason from human ignorance to a specific probability of a fact of reality. Can you?

No. Thats not sensible at all.

You can’t dismiss the possibility of the unknown without proof, however you can propose a theory that something may not exist if there is no evidence of its existence. Ultimately it cannot be ruled out as a possibility without proof that it doesn’t exist. So all were left with is inconclusive evidence and theories.

 

[Hank77]

Tacitus wrote about christians in 116 AD. That's 83 years after christ was supposedly crucified.

Tacitus was born c.56, 23 yrs. after the execution of the Christ. This says to me that it's likely that his own father and grandparents were alive. Do you believe your own grandfather wouldn't be able to tell you of an event that happened less an a generation before you were born?
I was a child when JFK was assassinated but I could give my kids and grandkids a good accounting of what happened.

We don't know where Tacitus got his information, but it is certainly accurate when it comes to Pontius Pilate and Nero and the burning of Rome. It seems quite unlikely that he would have gotten all of that right but gotten the information about the Christ and Christians all wrong. To think that would be illogical.

 

[klutedavid]

Good question, well phrased.

Amazing coincidence? No. Even amazing coincidences have a > 0 probability of happening.

If he spoke to me audibly? No. This could be the result of some form of illness.

A million little miracles? No. However unlikely a miracle is, the probability is > 0.

If god showed me something in a way that only I would understand? No. I could easily fool myself.

So what proof would convince me?

1. The scientific community would have to reach a consensus, based on the scientific methodology, that whatever information is submitted, is acceptable as proof.

2. If god is the all powerful being that people claim, then he would know what proof is required.

Mathematics deals in proofs but science does not.

According to the scripture God is Spirit.

This means that God is beyond definition in both philosophy and science.

No one can prove that God exists nor can anyone disprove the existence of God.

Science is struggling to understand sub atomic physics. Science cannot even prove the Big Bang even occurred or that a singularity has ever existed.

Faith is the foundation of everything, whether your a scientist, a philosopher, or even an atheist. Your fundamental position will always be a position of faith in your ability to define, to reason, to follow logical steps.

 

[durangodawood]

You can’t dismiss the possibility of the unknown without proof, however you can propose a theory that something may not exist if there is no evidence of its existence. Ultimately it cannot be ruled out as a possibility without proof that it doesn’t exist. So all were left with is inconclusive evidence and theories.

I agree. But to go from there to a specific probability one way or the other is unwarranted.

 

[Halbhh]

I agree. But to go from there to a specific probability one way or the other is unwarranted.

To me, it's just test, test, and more testing, until you feel confident (according to your degree of caution or carefulness or skepticism or scientific attitude) to have experienced whether the principle/idea/way is better than other competing ways. I did that for many years. It took me about 10 years really from the first rigorous testing to be all the way to accepting what I was seeing was the way it had proven so many times. The extraordinary took extronaordinary testing. For me. That was how it was for me. I'm certainly not saying others have to do just what I did, but I can say just what I did.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Prove that god has answers.

All the books of all wisdom and knowledge are in the library in Heaven. So you will have to go there if you want to see for yourself. If you have a question, if there is any wisdom or knowledge that you need then you can send your angel to the library to do the research for you.

The Bible is not written in a phonics language. The letters in the Bible are symbols. For example the letter B represents a tent or a dwelling. When a letter is symbolic then it is impossible to lie. The letter C represents camel. This was written at the time of Moses. Now the symbol has evolved over time. People travel on an airplane more then they do on a camel. So this has evolved. The symbol remains consistent and true. This is just like the symbols in chemistry and what they represent. They are very exact & precise the way the atoms are structured.

 

[Halbhh]

Prove that god has answers

To me, I think the only way to 'prove' an idea/theory/principle works in real life is to test it in real life, repeatedly, until it proves out repeatedly or fails.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Prove that god has answers. In fact, before you prove that god has answers, you need to prove god.

Yes and proof is math. Every letter has an exact mathematical number. You need to look into Gematria and then you will see the exact mathmatical proof that you are asking for. Written entirely in Hebrew, a Torah scroll contains 304,805 letters, all of which must be duplicated precisely by a trained scribe. They make a precise duplicate by counting the letters. Then they know right away if there is a mistake.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I agree. But to go from there to a specific probability one way or the other is unwarranted.

Luckily as Christians we don’t have to prove that He exists we just have to believe that He exists.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

And you know this how? What is your evidence?



Oh, dear. Actually, there are no accounts of jesus during his lifetime. If you know of any, please make them known to religious scholars. I'm sure that they would fall over themselves to read it. The Romans, who were one of the most anally-retentive peoples ever to walk the Earth, wrote nothing about jesus during his lifetime. Odd, don't you think?



Oh dear (again). Actually, Flavius Josephus wasn't even alive during jesus' supposed lifetime. He wasn't born until 37 AD. In his book, the Antiquities of the Jews, there is indeed a passage about jesus in book 18 as you point out. It is commonly referred to as the Testimonium Flaviatum. Many scholars, including christian ones, have rejected the Testimonium as a fraud. In any case, the book was written about 94 AD, long after jesus was supposedly crucified.

See Richard Carrier's investigation of the historicity of jesus. It is no longer logical and acceptable to take the existence of jesus as a given.



You need to look up the definition of "evidence" I would suggest. Perhaps you should replace this term with 'faith"?

I am afraid the burden is on you to prove there is no God. I am not convinced.

 

[klutedavid]

How do you know jesus actually had an Earthy existence?

Richard Carrier, and others, have researched the historicity of jesus and concluded that he never actually had an Earthly existence.

The historicity of Jesus is the question of whether Jesus of Nazareth can be regarded as a historical figure. Virtually all scholars who have investigated the history of the Christian movement find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain,[1][2][3] and standard historical criteria has aided in reconstructing his life.[4] However, scholars differ on the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels. (wikipedia)

No one seriously questions the historicity of Jesus Christ. If you reject that Jesus Christ existed, then you can throw the school of history in the bin also.

 

[klutedavid]

I dont see how the very-bigness of the universe is a reason for a creator. Would a creator be less necessary if the universe was 0.001 as big as we think it is? I just dont see how size indicates one way or the other re a creator. What is the connection?

I have never seen the connection between the size of the universe and the existence of God.

I see no correlation between the observable and that which cannot be observed. Even science now claims that the observable universe is actually invisible to us, dark matter and dark energy cannot be observed or measured.

Sub atomic physics promotes the concept of String theory, which proposes many universes.

Science extrapolates and generates ideas that are far beyond human understanding. Science promotes the idea of observation and measurement, but science has moved far beyond that criteria. Simply because our observations are counter intuitive, the observations are strange and defy comprehension.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

He already said.

No other sign will be given to those seeking proof, than one that was given.

A sign soundly denied by most people, even many Christians.