Jump to content

Christian Evidence


Recommended Posts

Science seems to work rather well. So any concept of God or any religious tenets that directly contradict science as buttressed by experimental evidence is clearly indistinguishable from superstition. Superstition is, essentially by definition, wrong.

 

If you define God as some sort of entity that exists outside of the natural universe and does not regularly disrupt the operation of that universe according to the principles discovered by science, then science and religion are disconnected, and neither has anything to say about the other. In this situation neither science nor logic can be brought to bear on the question of the existence of God. The order of the universe could be mere happenstance or it could be the result of God. The question is logically undecidable.

 

You are free to reach your own conclusion, or forego a final conclusion. But do not deceive yourself that whatever conclusion you reach is based on rigorous logic, unless you formulate a sufficiently narrow definition of God to be able to apply empirical data. In any case you should recognize that, despite the marvelous progress of science, there is a lot that we don't know. If we knew everything the satisfaction and outright fun of scientific discovery would be lost.

 

Bold mine

 

First of all you make a strong point.

 

I agree and will not pretend that my active denial of the existence of all conceivable deities is based on rigorous logic. However, I still draw the same conclusion as I've still yet to see any convincing positive evidence of a god existing under anyone's definition. As you are well aware, even more so than I, you can define just about anything in mathematics. The million dollar question is "will it be useful". I find the abstract deistic definitions of god to be just like useless definitions in mathematics. I say in response to those who would make such a definition of a god: "You can define it that way, but I see no reason to as it will lead to contradictions and/or will not accomplish anything of interest."

 

Again, your point is still strong and I cannot with strict logic invalidate it.

 

On a side note: where have you been man? Don't be a stranger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 400
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Um, yes, there are lots of problems. God could of created the world. You cannot argue with that. So far, I'm still saying "Where did the lithium-7 go", so I can argue with the big bang.   Would you

How about you read this: http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0220.htm and this: http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0505.htm   Did you ever consider you might want to learn the original language prop

~ Bertrand Russell     ~ Richard Dawkins     More here: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Russell%27s_Teapot

Posted Images

So far, there has been no evidence (NONE) that can't be explained in simpler terms than "Christianity is correct".

I doubt you usually read my posts.

As for the threat of going to hell, I look at it this way. If, at the end of my life, I find myself being judged by a God that tells me I'll be tormented forever for not worshiping Him, I'll be happy to tell Him I would never dream of being so cruel to anyone, so who was made in Who's image?

 

If this God tells me I'll be tormented forever because I flubbed on a couple of His commandments, I'll tell Him that even though He etched them in stone for Moses, they got hidden in the Ark of the Covenant, so people couldn't agree on whether to follow the version in Exodus or the one in Deuteronomy. He shouldn't hold that against us, since Someone hid the Ark.

 

And if He tells me I'll be tormented forever because I should have worshiped His son, I'll point out that His son got misused by a lot of people who did horrible things in his name, and I didn't want to take the chance of being one of them.

That's like robbing someone, and then going to court, and telling the judge that he is cruel, and that he never knew that he couldn't rob people. YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD!

Is a soul different from consciousness?

It depends on how you think of it. How are you thinking of it?

Your thoughts are individual to you and don't travel outside your brain. Why is that evidence that Christianity is correct?

You don't understand it. Just like the last time. It is very hard to explain. That is the best I could do.

This is just more circular reasoning, God is real because the Bible says so and the Bible is the word of God, who is real because the Bible says so.

Oh wow. There are miracles happening. The fact that we are here and had to come from somewhere. You won't take them as evidence. Let me ask you. What evidence is there that the Big Bang, and evolution are real. You can't use the fact that we are here as evidence. You can't use "scientific miracles" like anything to do with dark matter, or anything that lacks much evidence like that. What evidence do you now have? Not once have I said "God is real because the Bible says so and the Bible is the word of God, who is real because the Bible says so." though I have used the Bible as evidence, not as a main usage of evidence.

This is evidence to support the fact that you didn't read any of the talkorigins links that were given to you.

I did, weather you think so, or not(though I only read the parts that peaked my interest in the really long one, because I have more important things to do than read all that).

Why? Is flight the ultimate survival benefit for every creature? Is any creature that flies today better suited to our environment than we are?

Think about how enormous wings on a human would have to be, and how much more muscle we'd need to use them. Creatures with wings have extremely lightweight bodies with hollow bones. Isn't it better to have dense muscles and arms with hands and opposable thumbs so we can build airplanes?

Still, how do things evolve? I still think that if you're right we should have wings. Give me an example of something that would, and would evolve. I'm confused about why you would think such a thing.

 

EDIT: One of my answers didn't match the correct quote.

 

Never, if it is explained scientifically, which even the christian church admits 99.99% of "miracles" are.

 

So, if that's the case, why define anythign at all as a miracle? Why not assume there is, somewhere, an explanation, and look for it, instead of settling for "it's a miracle" and forgoing any sort of explanation, until someone comes back with one by accident or by research?

 

That's not evidence.

 

~mooey

 

So you're saying that the only way it can be a miracle is if clouds appeared in the sky? That's too picky. Are you saying that the evidence in the universe that the Big Bang is real is not evidence, because there are so many other ways that the universe could have been created (including by a god). That's what it seems I would be to you if I were like you, which I am not.

 

, have you now become an atheist and just funning us?

No.

You honestly think this is an argument? it's childish nonsense at best, insanity at worst.

This is the best way I could think of explaining it. It is very hard to explain. You don't get it.

Why would you expect people to have grown wings?

I think that it would be helpful for us to have wings. Isn't that how evolution works?

Edited by njaohnt
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think that it would be helpful for us to have wings. Isn't that how evolution works?

 

 

No that is not how evolution works, seriously njaohnt, you really need to watch this guys videos and stop listening to what people who don't know jack say science says... I am not being insulting, you don't know enough to even ask the right questions, at least I have read the bible and spent many years trying to under stand religion. spend an hour or so trying to under stand how the world works... watch the entire made easy series...

 

 

there are 11 of 12 of these videos, watch them, then ask questions

Edited by Moontanman
Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt you usually read my posts.

I've read them all.

 

That's like robbing someone, and then going to court, and telling the judge that he is cruel, and that he never knew that he couldn't rob people. YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD!

I've been told something different by every religion. Why should I believe Christianity? Because of all the evidence you can't produce?

 

It depends on how you think of it. How are you thinking of it?

An awareness of higher functions like mortality, individuality, wakefulness, overall control of our bodies within the framework of the universe we reside in.

 

You don't understand it. Just like the last time. It is very hard to explain. That is the best I could do.

Then it's not evidence.

Oh wow. There are miracles happening. The fact that we are here and had to come from somewhere. You won't take them as evidence.

Those things aren't evidence that God is real or that Christianity is the true religion. Seriously, we're here so God is real?! That's evidence?

 

Let me ask you. What evidence is there that the Big Bang, and evolution are real. You can't use the fact that we are here as evidence. You can't use "scientific miracles" like anything to do with dark matter, or anything that lacks much evidence like that. What evidence do you now have?

Big Bang and Evolution are both theories that use actual evidence and observation to describe the way things have developed over vast amounts of time. Evidence we've given you but was it was too lengthy for you to bother to read, so you take the easy way out and just say, "God did it".

 

Not once have I said "God is real because the Bible says so and the Bible is the word of God, who is real because the Bible says so. though I have used the Bible as evidence, not as a main usage of evidence.

The link you gave did.

 

I did, weather you think so, or not(though I only read the parts that peaked my interest in the really long one, because I have more important things to do than read all that).

But that's where the explanations are, where the evidence is. We have better things to do than to reprint them here, especially when we're pretty sure you'll say you have better things to do than read all that.

 

Still, how do things evolve? I still think that if you're right we should have wings. Give me an example of something that would, and would evolve. I'm confused about why you would think such a thing.

Okay. You like wings so lets take a bird. A finch that somehow made it's way to Hawaii. We know from fossils that they didn't always live there, but at some point they got way out in the middle of the Pacific and found the island chain.

 

Today, there are many varieties of finches, and they all feed on different things, they evolved this way. At some point in the past, one finch had a bill that was slightly curved and found it easier to sip nectar from a special flower with curved petals. That made this particular finch more successful and he mated and passed along his genes to the next generation. Each of the following generations had finches with beaks that were even more curved and they were even more successful at getting more nectar to eat. Now we have a finch called the Honeycreeper with an extremely curved beak that makes him very successful for his environment. Guess what? We even have evidence that the flower he likes evolved even more curved petals as the Honeycreeper's beak evolved. Co-evolution between plants and animals. Awesome!

 

 

pd405532.jpg

 

This is part of how evolution works, selective pressures from our environment cause small changes over time to accumulate into large changes over large amounts of time. We'd only grow wings if there was something pressuring us to grow them.

 

This is observed in many different ways in every species. We can even see evolution working in our lifetimes by observing insects with short lifespans. This is also a very simplistic explanation for a very complex process.

 

You can feel free to believe God used the Big Bang and Evolution for His own purposes. Science isn't concerned with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with njao in the way that a lot of these concepts can be hard to wrap your mind around and understand, A lot of this is because what you are trying to say can be hard to put into at least english. Then some concepts can be extremely hard to wrap your mind around unless you are the person with the idea and the thought.

 

On top of the fact that without a certain view some things cannot be understood and realized at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with njao in the way that a lot of these concepts can be hard to wrap your mind around and understand, A lot of this is because what you are trying to say can be hard to put into at least english. Then some concepts can be extremely hard to wrap your mind around unless you are the person with the idea and the thought.

 

On top of the fact that without a certain view some things cannot be understood and realized at all.

Hi Scourge - but your point sends us back down a path of personal revelation, and this thread was meant to be on Christian Evidence. All evidence and evidential systems require a trust (perhaps even a little faith) in the process and system - but that trust is needed due to human factors (time constraints etc). I trust that the physics departments and journals of the world are not perpetuating dogma to reinforce their power and influence - but if push came to shove and with enough money I could check. I trust that the police do not routinely manufacture evidence and that the evidence they give in court is on-the-whole subjectively true - and again I could check this out (with probably sobering and distressing results). But evidence which requires personal revelation, or a communion with god, or a belief in the supernatural etc - defies this check-up. What I am trying to say is that the belief and faith required to accept evidence of god is of a different quality and order to that required to accept more mundane worldly evidence. If you need faith and prior belief to understand the concepts leading to the evidence, or the arguments involved, or the evidence itself - then it is not evidence as that word is normally used, it is just an extension of your faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An awareness of higher functions like mortality, individuality, wakefulness, overall control of our bodies within the framework of the universe we reside in.

Then no, that is not what I meant by soul.

I meant more that a soul is a what makes you who you, setting you apart from other people, and the thing that feels your consciousness so that you can be here, and not just have your brain living the world.

Then it's not evidence.

If you don't understand some evidence, that doesn't make it not evidence, it's just not evidence for you.

Those things aren't evidence that God is real or that Christianity is the true religion. Seriously, we're here so God is real?! That's evidence?

Yes, it is also evidence of the Big Bang, and every other stories of how the world came to be.

Big Bang and Evolution are both theories that use actual evidence and observation to describe the way things have developed over vast amounts of time. Evidence we've given you but was it was too lengthy for you to bother to read, so you take the easy way out and just say, "God did it".

That's not evidence. Anyone could just do anything with it, you could have even copied it from somewhere else. I'll use the "Tres Juicy made the world" theory. Just saying something doesn't make it evidence(a little, but hardly any).

 

The Tres Juicy made the world theory uses actual evidence and observation of the great Tres Juicy(note that you could have put scientists such as Charles Darwin here) to describe the way things have been made over the years.

Okay. You like wings so lets take a bird...

Thanks for showing me instead of just telling me to research. Edited by njaohnt
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that anyone got the soul thing. Does my older post help?

This also says that there has to be a soul in everyone. Imagine someone watching the big bang happen, they can see the whole universe and they are right outside the universe, and they know everything that happens in it. This will be hard to understand, but how can you be you? The person watching sees everything happen. Fast forward 14 billion years, here, you are. He sees the electricity go through your nerves, making you think, and view(I changed this from veiw) your screen. But how do you physically exist as you? Are you just a bunch of parts put together? How? Yeah, you are consistently thinking with your brain, but how are you you, and not everybody. Imagine that we all have souls controlling us, and then our souls all go in a box beside the person watching. Now what? We are beings being controlled by brains. That's basically what things in the universe is(changed from are) like now by the big bang theory. So how are thinking by you, and not just a brain. Like I said, this is hard to understand.

From the anti big bang case for a creator thread.

Edited by njaohnt
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta get me a pair of them biblical glasses so i can wrap my puny mind around those horse feathers...

 

Because that lowers the relevance of the statement whatsoever.

 

I guess a previous statement i have seen gets at it a little better but dosnt exactly explain it.

 

For those with faith no evidence is needed. For those without no evidence is possible.

 

I guess this touches the idea a little bit. But it isnt complete. Oh yes and by the way thank you imfaatal for not going straight to offense and being rude and secretly attacking me for my statement while making it appear like your attacking the statement. But anyway back to my point. You see it once you truely have faith. But it is only possible through gaining it and realistically having it. But by this point your faith is strong enough to where you do not really need evidence anyway. But besides that i believe you may also need a certain type of comprehension. Not calling atheist idiots or inferior. I am saying that to realize the evidence you have to have faith. Here is what i DO NOT mean to make things clear.

 

God created the world and everything in it including the first human beings. If you are not a christian you do not believe that therefore its not evidence for you. If you are christian then you do believe it and its evidence for you.

 

This IS NOT what i mean by this statement. I mean a different comprehension that is achived through it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that anyone got the soul thing. Does my older post help?

 

From the anti big bang case for a creator thread.

 

 

njaohnt, yes we are controlled by our brains, what part of that do you have a problem with. Injure your brain and you stop, no mysterious soul comes to the rescue and keeps moving you around. You are your brain, your brain is you, cut off the oxygen to your brain and you die, you do not continue to move around inside your body with out a brain.... your body can live with a dead brain or mostly dead anyway but it is just a body, it has nothing and will never be anything with out your brain... there is no mysterious soul telling your body what to do independent of your brain... ever hear of brain dead? that is dead, dead njaohnt, dead... actually only a very small part of your brain is you the rest is just machinery...

 

Because that lowers the relevance of the statement whatsoever.

 

I guess a previous statement i have seen gets at it a little better but dosnt exactly explain it.

 

For those with faith no evidence is needed. For those without no evidence is possible.

 

I guess this touches the idea a little bit. But it isnt complete. Oh yes and by the way thank you imfaatal for not going straight to offense and being rude and secretly attacking me for my statement while making it appear like your attacking the statement. But anyway back to my point. You see it once you truely have faith. But it is only possible through gaining it and realistically having it. But by this point your faith is strong enough to where you do not really need evidence anyway. But besides that i believe you may also need a certain type of comprehension. Not calling atheist idiots or inferior. I am saying that to realize the evidence you have to have faith. Here is what i DO NOT mean to make things clear.

 

God created the world and everything in it including the first human beings. If you are not a christian you do not believe that therefore its not evidence for you. If you are christian then you do believe it and its evidence for you.

 

This IS NOT what i mean by this statement. I mean a different comprehension that is achived through it.

 

 

Horse feathers....

Edited by Moontanman
Link to post
Share on other sites

As you would say, That is a forward assertion can you show evidence of such? Without my statement contradicting that?

 

 

My point would be that it's not an argument for any god much less the Christian one unless it's also an argument for every other god. Do you think that Muslim do not have faith? or Hindus? Wiccins? All religions require you to have faith and believe in things not demonstrably true. Your faith shows nothing but your gullibility...

 

Faith with no evidence is... horse feathers....

 

Edited by Moontanman
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is to a non-believer, But as i have said. To us the evidence is clear, Why? Maybe i should check up on that or find something on that i dont really know yet. But i am not saying this is compelling evidence to convert you to christianity. I have just happened to stumble upon it and am satisfied with it. With bigger faith comes the more evidence to show you. You get what you give.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is to a non-believer, But as i have said. To us the evidence is clear, Why? Maybe i should check up on that or find something on that i dont really know yet. But i am not saying this is compelling evidence to convert you to christianity. I have just happened to stumble upon it and am satisfied with it. With bigger faith comes the more evidence to show you. You get what you give.

 

 

You are at best being condescending and at worst insulting... Do you think I never looked into religion? It dominated much of my life. I at least have made a real effort to understand religion, yes i once believed, very deeply, but it's irrational to believe something on faith alone and your idea of belief is not evidence for anything but your own faith. As I pointed out every other religion demands and gets the same faith from it's followers and they believe just as strongly as you. How is your faith justification of belief in any god much less yours?

 

Is faith just part of group social pressure?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2NduSCLiMA

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point would be that it's not an argument for any god much less the Christian one unless it's also an argument for every other god. Do you think that Muslim do not have faith? or Hindus? Wiccins? All religions require you to have faith and believe in things not demonstrably true. Your faith shows nothing but your gullibility...

 

Faith with no evidence is... horse feathers....

 

 

That's not true. Where did the word "evidence" come from? People made it up. I was thinking about this. Why do wee need evidence? There is not enough evidence against this. If you want evidence, I will give you evidence. I don't think it is necessary. The only reason why you would want evidence is if you're talking about something completely wrong, which God is not completely wrong. Is there any thought in your mind that you might be the one who is wrong? How sure are you that what the Christians is horse feathers? Maybe what you think is the real horse feathers. Again, you want evidence, evidence you will get. I don't understand how you think that listening to some "good" atheist scientists is better.

 

The "Tres Juicy made the World" theory is something that I would ask evidence of.

 

More so, there already enough evidence against atheism, and enough evidence with Christianity from just looking out the window.

 

Is faith just part of group social pressure?

 

No. In fact, it is the opposite.

Edited by njaohnt
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not true. Where did the word "evidence" come from? People made it up. I was thinking about this. Why do wee need evidence? There is not enough evidence against this. If you want evidence, I will give you evidence. I don't think it is necessary. The only reason why you would want evidence is if you're talking about something completely wrong, which God is not completely wrong. Is there any thought in your mind that you might be the one who is wrong? How sure are you that what the Christians is horse feathers? Maybe what you think is the real horse feathers. Again, you want evidence, evidence you will get. I don't understand how you think that listening to some "good" atheist scientists is better.

 

njaohnt, evidence is just a made up word, are you really suggesting that??? Atheist scientists? Most scientists are religious in some way most of them are Christian. You are the extreme fringe, your ideas lead to things like burning heretics at the stake, can you not see this?

 

The "Tres Juicy made the World" theory is something that I would ask evidence of.

 

And rightly so but why does the idea that god, and in fact by your own assertions your god, made the world not need evidence?

 

More so, there already enough evidence against atheism, and enough evidence with Christianity from just looking out the window.

 

Show some evidence stop making empty claims...

 

No. In fact, it is the opposite.

 

 

I gave evidence it is social pressure, now show evidence it is not...

Edited by Moontanman
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are at best being condescending and at worst insulting... Do you think I never looked into religion? It dominated much of my life. I at least have made a real effort to understand religion, yes i once believed, very deeply, but it's irrational to believe something on faith alone and your idea of belief is not evidence for anything but your own faith. As I pointed out every other religion demands and gets the same faith from it's followers and they believe just as strongly as you. How is your faith justification of belief in any god much less yours?

 

Is faith just part of group social pressure?

 

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=-2NduSCLiMA

 

 

I have seen that you have said that you have been involved with our religion. Had you payed any attention at all to previous post you would see that i said i am not trying to insult or make you look inferior. I also previously stated that for those that believe no evidence is needed and for those that do not none is possible? That statement does not say that it only strengthens the belief of those that already have faith? Does the idea that you get what you give offend you? I think (without watching the videos yet, After i watch them you may mean other than what the question before them says) that atheism is more pressured than religion anymore. It would be easier on your social life if you just represented yourself as an atheist and even easier to actually be one and hide nothing. In my part of the country atheism is sweeping through the new generation. Saying your religious is more and more damaging to your social life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen that you have said that you have been involved with our religion. Had you payed any attention at all to previous post you would see that i said i am not trying to insult or make you look inferior. I also previously stated that for those that believe no evidence is needed and for those that do not none is possible? That statement does not say that it only strengthens the belief of those that already have faith? Does the idea that you get what you give offend you? I think (without watching the videos yet, After i watch them you may mean other than what the question before them says) that atheism is more pressured than religion anymore. It would be easier on your social life if you just represented yourself as an atheist and even easier to actually be one and hide nothing. In my part of the country atheism is sweeping through the new generation. Saying your religious is more and more damaging to your social life.

 

None the less your statement "for those that believe no evidence is needed and for those that do not none is possible" is not evidence of anything what so ever and does not support your Christian god, if you insist it does then it supports Lord Krishna just as much, and my ancestors Great Spirit and Odin, Zeus, Jupiter, Adrianna, the list goes on and on....

 

Have you ever considered the reason saying you are religious is damaging to your social life might because it indicates you are likely judgmental and consistently trying to tell people the good news they do not see as particularly good or even news?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most scientists are religious in some way most of them are Christian.

 

97% of surveyed Royal society members and 93% of National academy of sciences members answer "No" to the question "Do you believe in a personal god?" http://www.humanreli...telligence.html www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html, so given the available empirical data, one would have to conclude that most scientists are not Christians.

 

njaohnt - let's say I have an R1 research laboratory at my disposal. Can you give me a prediction I can test that is only attributable to God? Say that if I put a beaker into the laminar flow hood and pray to God to tip it on its side, it will do so a significant number of times? Or perhaps I can set up a PCR, not put the Taq polymerase in and still get amplification if I put the bible on top of the thermocycler? This is the sort of experimental evidence I am expected to provide to support all the other positive claims I make in the realm of science.

 

Now to preempt it - I am already fully aware that religion does not manifest in this manner. It is because belief in God relies on FAITH.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I already said that this does not act as evidence for you. I already said that if they dont want to hear it than they wont hear it.

 

 

I understand that and I disagree, it would be quite easy for god to provide real evidence of his existence, he has in the past if you believe his holy books, now days a miracle could be documented for all time, simply stopping the sun in the sky would be quite convincing, exchange the orbits of Mars and Venus so they can be inhabited without disturbing the orbits of the other planets would be an absolute miracle, and don't say we can't demand a test of god, he has done miraculous things in the past, very distant past, not with the time frame that would allow us to know it to have happened, wild claims are easy to make, showing them be real is more difficult, but aside from that you are offering it as evidence of your god and as I said it supports the notion of all gods not just yours...

Link to post
Share on other sites

@scourge

 

Evidence is not a belief.

 

Evidence is not a desire.

 

Evidence is not an opinion.

 

Evidence is not a suspicion.

 

Evidence is not writings of unproven provenance.

 

Evidence is not a passionately declared statement.

 

Evidence is not a majority opinion.

 

Evidence is not a minority opinion.

 

Evidence is measurable, repeatable observation consistent with a hypothesis.

 

So what is your evidence against atheism? Remember, it must take heed of the above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

97% of surveyed Royal society members and 93% of National academy of sciences members answer "No" to the question "Do you believe in a personal god?" http://www.humanreli...telligence.html www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html, so given the available empirical data, one would have to conclude that most scientists are not Christians.

 

I have seen data that says that most scientists represent themselves as Christian, I'm not sure if that is a personal god or just their belief in a god and the christian one is the one they are most familiar with but I honestly think it's irrelevant to the discussion because the idea that all scientists are atheists and therefore cannot be trusted is bogus...

 

njaohnt - let's say I have an R1 research laboratory at my disposal. Can you give me a prediction I can test that is only attributable to God? Say that if I put a beaker into the laminar flow hood and pray to God to tip it on its side, it will do so a significant number of times? Or perhaps I can set up a PCR, not put the Taq polymerase in and still get amplification if I put the bible on top of the thermocycler? This is the sort of experimental evidence I am expected to provide to support all the other positive claims I make in the realm of science.

 

Now to preempt it - I am already fully aware that religion does not manifest in this manner. It is because belief in God relies on FAITH.

 

 

The idea that god has to be believed on faith alone has not always been true, stopping the rotation of the earth would be quite convincing...

Edited by Moontanman
Link to post
Share on other sites

but aside from that you are offering it as evidence of your god and as I said it supports the notion of all gods not just yours...

 

How does what you get in return when you give more faith also evidence other religions? The fact that you get what you give is of course not "solid" evidence to any of the parties. Only if it shows true in that religion and what it is you realize and understand. But on the other side this acts as nothing to atheist. They can ponder the truthful nature of the statement itself.

Edited by scourge
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.