The Mariana Trench

[Freodin]

There is no difference.

The Mariana Trench was verified by those who were there and documented it.

Jesus' resurrection was verified by those who were there and documented it.

Now my following objection can be applied to any secular historical documentation, and I won´t deny that. Though history works on more than documentation, it is a more difficult field than the natural sciences.

So, we are talking about verifiable data here. The Mariana Trench was measured and documented... and if you don´t accept the documentation, you can go and do the measurment yourself. Regardless of the costs or the diffuculties - YOU CAN DO IT! There is nothing fundamental that would keep you.

But how would you go and verify Jesus´ resurrection? Answer: you cannot. It is unverifiable.

Do you now see the difference?

Speaking of five hundred, how many total eyewitnesses to the depth of the Mariana Trench do we have?

Many more. In fact, the number is three million five hundred thousand and eighty five. Do you take that on faith or not?

Yes --- since that 'verifiable scientific data' is in written form.

How is it verifiable? This is the core point! How do you go about and verify this documentation? If you can´t find a way, my "scientific" faith trumps your "unscientific" one.

Not at all --- I'm the one claiming the Flood happened.

Me --- the same person who claims there's zero evidence for that Flood --- remember?

Yes, I didn´t really think so. You are not interested in backing up your faith.

I don't need evidence --- I have [faith in] the Documentation.

Yes, and that is the difference about which I was talking. You don´t need evidence - you don´t HAVE evidence. The scientific faith has, and can provide if required.

Seeing as how highly I hold them up, that's quite a statement.

I don´t QV my posts... but do you want to talk about Buggs Bunny in the Bible again?

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Now my following objection can be applied to any secular historical documentation, and I won´t deny that. Though history works on more than documentation, it is a more difficult field than the natural sciences.

So, we are talking about verifiable data here. The Mariana Trench was measured and documented... and if you don´t accept the documentation, you can go and do the measurment yourself. Regardless of the costs or the diffuculties - YOU CAN DO IT! There is nothing fundamental that would keep you.

But how would you go and verify Jesus´ resurrection? Answer: you cannot. It is unverifiable.

Do you now see the difference?


Many more. In fact, the number is three million five hundred thousand and eighty five. Do you take that on faith or not?


How is it verifiable? This is the core point! How do you go about and verify this documentation? If you can´t find a way, my "scientific" faith trumps your "unscientific" one.


Yes, I didn´t really think so. You are not interested in backing up your faith.


Yes, and that is the difference about which I was talking. You don´t need evidence - you don´t HAVE evidence. The scientific faith has, and can provide if required.


I don´t QV my posts... but do you want to talk about Buggs Bunny in the Bible again?

Freodin 1
Av 0

 

[AV1611VET]

So, we are talking about verifiable data here.

That's my point.

Re-read my OP, please.

You can do it, but you choose not to, because you choose to believe the documentation.

In other words: the documentation says it --- that settles it.

Once you go down there yourself, you've take faith out of the equation.

It is now no longer 'faith' --- it is 'sight'.

This thread deals with those who will never go there, can't go there, and wouldn't - even if they could.

In their thinking, it was verified by someone else, and that's good enough for them --- case closed.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

That's my point.

Re-read my OP, please.

You can do it, but you choose not to, because you choose to believe the documentation.

In other words: the documentation says it --- that settles it.

Once you go down there yourself, you've take faith out of the equation.

It is now no longer 'faith' --- it is 'sight'.

This thread deals with those who will never go there, can't go there, and wouldn't - even if they could.

In their thinking, it was verified by someone else, and that's good enough for them --- case closed.

Accepting scientific data as 'faith' is NOT 'faith' in your religious sense of the word when one can actually verify for themselves. If you don't accept this point, well, then, not sure where to go from here.

 

[mpok1519]

I'm not talking about lying --- I'm talking about telling the truth.

Lying is a whole different department --- 1.

but your ideaof "telling the truth" and "documenting Jesus" has nothing to do with data or verifiable truth. --- [insert random but common derail number here]

 

[mpok1519]

yes; one CAN verify for theirself that the mariana trench is"x" feet wide/deep.

no one can verify for theirself if Jesus even existed, even with a time machine.

 

[AV1611VET]

Accepting scientific data as 'faith' is NOT 'faith' in your religious sense of the word when one can actually verify for themselves. If you don't accept this point, well, then, not sure where to go from here.

Let's go here:

Suppose there was a submarine earthquake and the trench closed or was filled in so effectively, it left no seams to look for.

Now what?

I'll tell you what: nothing --- no big deal.

Ask me how deep it was, and I'll give you the same answer: 6.78 miles.

That's called 'walking by faith'.

HOWEVER --- this thread is not dealing with 'unverifiable evidence' --- it is dealing with 'verifiable evidence' that people choose to believe, w/o ever having been there.

 

[mpok1519]

and Jesus' existence is unverifiable.

the trench is verifiable.

thus, believing the trench is x miles deep DOES NOT require faith.

 

[AV1611VET]

yes; one CAN verify for theirself that the mariana trench is"x" feet wide/deep.

no one can verify for theirself if Jesus even existed, even with a time machine.

Remember my old Millard Filmore thread, where I challenged people to show Millard Filmore was the President of the United States, without using documentation?

Even though he was the President, we wouldn't know it w/o the documentation.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

'Walking by faith?'
'Fraid not.

 

[mpok1519]

Remember my old Millard Filmore thread, where I challenged people to show Millard Filmore was the President of the United States, without using documentation?

Even though he was the President, we wouldn't know it w/o the documentation.

lol and such a thing is impossible. You challenges are based on impossible scenarios. thus, why it is not even a challenge bc it is esily debunked.
----------

people out there are consciously aware of the fact that they're related to millard fillmore; you dont need documents.

find me someone whos related to Jesus and can prove it without proving it. lol

 

[mpok1519]

~yawn~ AV is bored again.

 

[TerranceL]

Will he get this thread closed too?

 

[KhlulHloo]

According to Wikipedia, the Mariana Trench reaches a maximum depth of 6.78 miles.

Blah blah blah
Been there done that.

Try on R'lyeh* or Enoch for size.

~yawn~



*not pronounced as most of the single mouthed talking marshmallow peeps pronounce it.

 

[juvenissun]

"Walking" by faith? "W A L K I N G" by faith? Just who calls it that (besides yourself, that is)?

Normally we say something like, "Accepted on good authority."

It is self-cheating. People did "accept" Bernie Madoff.

 

[Hespera]

It is self-cheating. People did "accept" Bernie Madoff.

Yes, and others "accept" the OT, the NT, and even the latest update from that guy in Missouri.

When is someone going to tell me why if belief in evolution requires "faith",

The Bible teaches that the object of faith (who or what is believed in) is God and His Son Jesus Christ.

The Bible teaches that the reward of faith (what faith accomplishes) is eternal life.


This is confusing. It cant be "faith" in evolution or the depth of the ocean then, coz those objects are not God.

But if it is "faith" then faith in ocean depth brings eternal life!

More confusion...

The Bible teaches that the proof of faith (what faith is based on) is evidence.

Ok... lets go out and look for evidence of the ocean depth, and for evidence to back the claims of religion.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Bible teaches that the reward of faith (what faith accomplishes) is eternal life.

Just fyi, eternal life is a gift, not a reward.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

 

[Hespera]

Just fyi, eternal life is a gift, not a reward.

Just saying what I read that the bible teaches. If xtians got their story straight it might be a bit more believable. Too many contradictory versions! Not that "eternal life" is real anyway, but it just seems like there should be only one version of the story.

But if you wish to inform me of matters of faith, could you define the term?

And explain what if any (you think is) is the difference between faith in ocean depth and faith in god?

 

[AV1611VET]

And explain what if any (you think is) is the difference between faith in ocean depth and faith in god?

Read the OP again, please.

I'm talking about faith in the documentation.

 

[Hespera]

Read the OP again, please.

I'm talking about faith in the documentation.

Documentation is pretty worthless if you cant verify it in in any way.

It is documented that some golden books were found in new york state.

Ocean depth can be verified. Gold books cant.

Could you please tell me the difference between faith in unverifiable documentation and faith in ocean depth?