questioning

[sardemz]

I recently read this, and it has me questioning religion in general more than ever.

images.4chan.org/b/src/1274203705810.gif

I was wondering what others' thoughts were.

:::not intended to offend or attack in any way.

 

[Hentenza]

LOL!!! Whoever printed that has no understanding of God or the scriptures. I would suggest getting away from 4chan (a confirmed trash website) and asking your questions to your pastor. There are perfectly good and logical answers (refutations) to the premises depicted in that atheist track.

 

[salida]

Do your research and homework before you believe a misguided delusional person.

Christian concept: www.livingwaters.com/good/
Visit: www.TheBibleProofBook.com. And you can read The Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell (its overwhelming circumstantial evidence of bible) and Examine the Evidence by Muncaster a former athiest/The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel a former athiest.

Internal Evidence (prophesies confirmed within bible)
Life of Christ
The Tribe of Judah, Gen 49:10 - Luke 3:23-28
(Genesis was written 4004 BC to 1689 BC)
(Lukes time period 60-70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Royal Line of David, Jer 23:5 - Matt 1:1
(Jeremiah 760 to 698 BC)/(Matthew 60 - 70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Born of a Virgin, Isaiah 7:14 - Matt 1:18-23
(Isaiah 760 to 698 BC)/(Matthew 60 - 70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Rise of Empires
In the book of Daniel, Chapter 2 - four kingdoms are described in the interpretation of a dream of
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greek - Daniel 8:21, 10:20/and the fourth
great kingdom to follow- part iron and clay-which is the Roman Empire. During this empire Christ came and his church was established.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historical Accuracy
The bible is loaded with historical statements concerning events hundreds of years ago and has not
been proven incorrect in any.
(Bible compared to other ancient documents):
New Testament starts - at 25 years between original and first surviving copies
Homer - starts at 500 years
Demosthenes - at 1400 years
Plato - at 1200 years
Caesar - at 1000 years
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Manuscript Copies-New Testament - 5,686/Homer - 643/Demosthenes - 200/
Plato - 7/Caesar -10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistency/Written by God
Written by at least 40 men over a period of time exceeding 1400 years and has no internal inconsistencies.
It claims to be spoken by God, 2 Timothy 3:16-17. No other religious book makes such claim.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
External Evidences (prophesies outside bible)
These cities were prophesied to be destroyed and never built again.
Nineveh - Nahum 1:10, 3:7,15, Zephaniah 2:13-14
Babylon - Isaiah 13:1-22
Tyre - Ezekiel 26:1-28
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bible before Science- He hangs the earth on nothing-Job 26:7/Earth is a sphere-Isaiah 40:22
Air has weight-Job 28:25/Gravity-Job 26:7, Job 38:31-33/Winds blow in cyclones, Eccl 1:6
(Job was written at least 1000 years ago; some scholars think 3000 years ago)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Documents that Prove Bible is True
Gilgamesh Epic, The Sumerian King List, Mari Tablets, Babylonian Chronicles
Archeological Finds
Excavations of Ur, Location of Zoar, Ziggurats and the foundation of Tower of Babel

 

[salida]

Plus the athiests-if they are honest with themselves-they would visit the website Reasonable Faith-a great debater Craig runs this site and the famous athiest Richard Dawkins won't debate him because he will steam roll him.

 

[LinuxLurker01]

Um, 4chan? /b/?

Is this for real?

 

[cateye]

The Tribe of Judah, Gen 49:10 - Luke 3:23-28
(Genesis was written 4004 BC to 1689 BC)
(Lukes time period 60-70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Royal Line of David, Jer 23:5 - Matt 1:1
(Jeremiah 760 to 698 BC)/(Matthew 60 - 70 AD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Born of a Virgin, Isaiah 7:14 - Matt 1:18-23
(Isaiah 760 to 698 BC)/(Matthew 60 - 70 AD)

Oh, prophecies, ah? How about you provide some rigorous evidence that they indeed constitute genuine prophecies? What criteria are you using to define whether they are? What are your criteria for genuine prophecy?

 

[razeontherock]

Cateye, that's skepticism to be sure, but it's surely not rational. Neither is it helpful at this juncture. Rationale answers your questions; perhaps you've never investigated them?

 

[cateye]

perhaps you've never investigated them?

You'd be surprised. What's so irrational about my question, btw? I'm only trying to avoid the 'Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy'.

As an aside: 'Internal Evidence', is useless as far as prophecies are concerned. "This biblical prophecy was fulfilled because the bible says it was fulfilled"?

Scientific 'foreknowledge' is just as problematic, as most (if not all) claims are also cases of a.m. fallacy. Iow: interpreting the claim to make it fit the facts.

 

[razeontherock]

'Internal Evidence', is useless as far as prophecies are concerned. "This biblical prophecy was fulfilled because the bible says it was fulfilled"?

This is the flaw in your logic:

the Bible is God's book to Man. The person not interested in what God has to say is only speaking to it's contents pretentiously.

Going beyond that, we are left with what we've been able to prove one way or the other via archeological artifacts. A common flaw is "we haven't found that so it's proven false." Remember how recently Pontious Pilate was "known to have never lived?" Yet now we have clear records. The only thing in order here is to

"humble thyself before thy God."

Peace.

 

[cateye]

the Bible is God's book to Man.

Evidence, please.

The person not interested in what God has to say is only speaking to it's contents pretentiously.

Which sounds like and ad hom and (no offence) a sorry excuse not to have to provide evidence.

A common flaw is "we haven't found that so it's proven false." Remember how recently Pontious Pilate was "known to have never lived?" Yet now we have clear records. The only thing in order here is to

Absense of evidence is not evidence of absence, as the late great Carl Sagan used to say. Yes, I know that. Unfortunately, there's also a couple of more or less serious historical errors in the bible. And in some cases, absence of evidence actually IS evidence of absence. The point is: positive claims need to be supported by evidence. If they're not, there's no good reason to take them at face value.

As it happens: I tend to accept that there was a historical Jesus. Whether he was the Jesus of the bible, though, is a different question.

"humble thyself before thy God."

Humble myself before someone I have no reason to believe exists? That doesn't make much sense, does it?

Oh, and you haven't replied to this: "What's so irrational about my question, btw?"

Cheers

 

[cateye]

Plus the athiests-if they are honest with themselves-they would visit the website Reasonable Faith-a great debater Craig runs this site and the famous athiest Richard Dawkins won't debate him because he will steam roll him.

Err... no, Dawkins doesn't debate Craig because Dawkins doesn't debate Creationists.

For the record, Craig's 'arguments' and lies have been destroyed time and again over at TalkRational, over at Dawkin's old forum, which you can still find on Dawkins's site, at RationalSkepticism, on the JREF forum, and other fora.

Craig is a good debater, and he's loud, but his 'arguments' are worthless.

 

[razeontherock]

Cateye, is there any way you can say that you are "struggling as a non-Christian, and looking for support from Christians?" If you have a positive and sincere answer, I won't rudely shoot it down with an "evidence please," but at this juncture I will point out it doesn't take the gift of discernment to see you're here to either pick a fight or spread your false Gospel in order to extinguish hope in those who struggle. (It was perfectly obvious long before this juncture.)

Oh, and you haven't replied to this: "What's so irrational about my question, btw?"

Actually I have, right off. You can read through it again and try to find an attitude that actually looks for the answer, but don't expect me to try again while you display the current attitude.

 

[Adoniram]

cateye, a quick question. Would you expect a dead man to be able to hear and understand what you were saying to him?

 

[cateye]

Cateye, is there any way you can say that you are "struggling as a non-Christian, and looking for support from Christians?"

Nope. But I'm not looking to pick a fight either. I'm interesting in other points of view, and I like seeing my own views challenged. It's refreshing, don't you agree?